Jump to content

New Exhaust System Plans


RandyA

Recommended Posts

What SeHc did not write is that removing or modifying the EGR system is, according to the EPA, illegal and subjects one to a $3,700 fine for each change and $37,000 for each vehicle.  The individual States are pretty much responsible for enforcement.  South Dakota could care less while in California a LEO can write a ticket on the spot if he suspects the emissions system on a vehicle has been tampered with. 

Switching channels a minute, these systems have been proven to decrease fuel mileage by 3% and increase the need for 3% more fuel.  Not a small amount considering the number of trucks on the road.  The EGR recycles part of the exhaust into the cylinders to dilute the air/fuel mixture and thus reduce NOx.  The fallacy of the system was they were only designed to be warrantied for 50,000 miles and the trucking industry found that the early EGR systems began to fail between 200,000 and 250,000 miles.  The demand for EGR coolers and the twin valves was high enough that Volvo could not initially supply enough repair parts. During the mean time, operating the truck actually increased NOx to higher levels than originally designed.  Repair cost to put new EGR parts on a 2003 Volvo D12 truck engine were averaging $6,500 for each vehicle.  Considering the age of trucks like mine (2004) with mileage like mine (850,000 miles) even if the EGR valves and sensors are working the amount of soot built up in the turbo, cooler, valves, and intake were significantly greater than a similar 2002 D12 engine that did not have the early EGR system.  Ironically, the amount of NOx and soot emissions out the exhaust increased while fuel mileage and performance decreased.  I have, for maintenance purposes, taken much of my EGR system off and was shocked at the carbon restrictions that had built up and how small the remaining opening was.  It took hours of cleaning and chipping to remove the build-up.  I did put the system back on because I knew it was illegal to remove the system even if it did not operate as envisioned when the truck was built.

As the owner of a truck that has this first generation EGR and rarely exceeds 5,000 miles per year I am considering making some changes to the engine to eliminate EGR which, at this point, would result in a cleaner engine unless I invest thousands of dollars to replace system components..

BTW - according to the law replacing the muffler or exhaust with a non-OEM product is also illegal.  The expectation is I should use the same muffler that Volvo originally installed on the truck.

While not a tree huger, I am extremely conscious of my Carbon foot print as well as other atmosphere damaging chemicals.  My carbon footprint alone is significantly less that our brick and sticks home during the 6+ months we live in our fiver.  The "controlled" burns the US Government conducts in our area are hundreds of times more damaging to our atmosphere than my truck.  That doesn't make my consideration legal - but it sure does make me loose respect for some of the requirements in the "Clean Air Act."  If you want to really get me going start a discussion of the 10% ethanol added to our gasoline.  As an Engineer (electrical/communications) the mantra consistently drummed into my head has not been forgotten: "You can never create or destroy energy, you can only convert it from one form to another."  Any time you convert energy like chemical to heat to mechanical in a truck you can expect a loss to an undesired form of energy or byproduct.  The goal should be making the energy change more efficient.  Many of the "rules" we are compelled to operate under simply do not address increasing efficiency as a means to reduce pollution.

Edited by RandyA

300.JPG.c2a50e50210ede7534c4c440c7f9aa80.JPG

Randy, Nancy and Oscar

"The Great White" - 2004 Volvo VNL670, D12, 10-speed, converted to single axle pulling a Keystone Cambridge 5th wheel, 40', 4 slides and about 19,000# with empty tanks.

ARS - WB4BZX, Electrical Engineer, Master Electrician, D.Ed., Professor Emeritus - Happily Retired!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well stated Randy, until the last bit about ethanol.  It was not intended as a way to use less petroleum, but rather as a way to put more oxygen in the fuel, thus lowering emissions.  Before ethanol, we had another oxygenate, I believe MTBE?  It worked well, but was found to be very carcinogenic, thus the switch.

But as you point out, in order to keep your egr system intact, you'd actually increase your carbon footprint, given the few miles you use the truck. 

Unfortunately, the biggest tree huggers rarely use common sense.  And I have first hand experience there, sitting on a board of a large conservation area.  I'm one of the few non PhD's on the board.  But I'm VP........

KW T-680, POPEMOBILE
Newmar X-Aire, VATICAN
Lots of old motorcycles, Moto Guzzi Griso and Spyder F3 currently in the front row
Young enough to play in the dirt as a retired farmer.
contact me at rickeieio1@comcast.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...