How many KM';s travelled with/Without EGR delete

[Talisker]

I am considering fitting an EGR delete mod to my NW, I do have a catch can fitted. The primary reason for me in fitting the delete is the soot that is going into the engine and the possible detrimental effect this could have on engine life however on the other side of the coin I wonder about the effect on the engine of having higher combustion chamber temperatures as the combustion will get more oxygen and burn hotter. Both are possibly bad for engine life.
SO I was wanting to get an idea of how many km's people have got from their cars with or without a form of EGR delete. I would love to get as many responses as possible with no of KM;'s and whether you do or don't have a form of EGR delete fitted.
Thanks in advance

[nj swb]

There is a difference between heat and temperature.

EGR delete will not damage the engine due to heat.

[Talisker]

There is a difference between heat and temperature.

EGR delete will not damage the engine due to heat.

I do believe heat and temperature are related :-).
This engine was designed and tested to operate at a significantly lower temperature than it will run at with an EGR delete. The lower combustion temps are why you get a decrease in NOX emissions and is the main reason for the EGR. removal of the EGR does significantly increase combustion temperatures as a result of the heat created and the engine was never tested or designed for this hence my question to see how the engines hold up over 300K Plus km's versus with the std EGR.

It will only be in the long term that we will actually know whether the EGR delete makes sense the catch can reduce if not eliminated the sludge issue in the EGR and manifold.
Hopefully, I will get some responses, thanks for your input though Cheers

[Dicko1]

I do believe heat and temperature are related :-).
This engine was designed and tested to operate at a significantly lower temperature than it will run at with an EGR delete. The lower combustion temps are why you get a decrease in NOX emissions and is the main reason for the EGR. removal of the EGR does significantly increase combustion temperatures as a result of the heat created and the engine was never tested or designed for this hence my question to see how the engines hold up over 300K Plus km's versus with the std EGR.

It will only be in the long term that we will actually know whether the EGR delete makes sense the catch can reduce if not eliminated the sludge issue in the EGR and manifold.
Hopefully, I will get some responses, thanks for your input though Cheers

I reckon your trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Many people for years have blocked of the egr on their crd motors with no ill affects.Nearly every diesel shop that does ecu remapping delete the egr...now if this was detrimental to the motor why would they promote the disabling of it?

[Talisker]

This is not a debate about whether or not its good to defeat the egr function. I am simply interested to see how many KM,s people are running up with an without an EGR.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[4ePikanini]

EGR is not deployed at full throttle and max boost when temperatures are at their highest.

EGR is only there to reduce NOx gasses. Deleting it will only have positive effects apart from emitting more NOx gasses.

[Talisker]

Sorry but just wanted to see the KMs people are doing but seems a bit difficult.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[nj swb]

I do believe heat and temperature are related :-).

Related, but different - just like mass and density are related, but different.

This engine was designed and tested to operate at a significantly lower temperature than it will run at with an EGR delete.

Wrong.

The lower combustion temps are why you get a decrease in NOX emissions and is the main reason for the EGR.

Right.

removal of the EGR does significantly increase combustion temperatures

Right.

as a result of the heat created

Wrong. Heat and temperature are different. Higher combustion temperature, but it doesn't make anything run hotter, because the amount of heat is well within the engine's capacity to dissipate it.

You need to understand the difference between heat and temperature. A small campfire coal at 1000 degrees contains much less heat than a large lump of iron at 600 degrees. Higher temperature / less heat versus lower temperature / more heat.

Drop each into a bucket of water, and see what happens to the water temperature. The water can absorb a small amount of heat from a higher temperature source much more easily than it can absorb a large amount of heat from a lower temperature source.

Similar principle with an EGR delete - a small amount of heat from elevated combustion temperatures under light load, versus masses of heat from lower combustion temperatures under heavy load. The engine is designed to dissipate the heat under heavy load, and can easily cope with any extra heat under light load.

Heat and temperature are different.

and the engine was never tested or designed for this

Because it's not an issue. The engine is designed to cope with much more heat than will be generated by an EGR delete. Manufacturers would quite happily throw away all their EGR systems if they weren't required to meet emissions tests. EGR systems aren't required to manage engine heat dissipation.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not advocating that people rush out to install EGR deletes. But this argument about increased combustion temperatures causing issues is wrong. Worrying about the combustion temperatures under light throttle conditions isn't a valid reason to avoid disabling EGR.

Worrying about NOx emissions might be.

[wanderay]

FWIW I have done about 210,000 with egr working and catch can fitted at 150,000 after significant buildup and cleanout of manifold. Still running smooth and strong.

[Talisker]

FWIW I have done about 210,000 with egr working and catch can fitted at 150,000 after significant buildup and cleanout of manifold. Still running smooth and strong.

Thanks will be interesting to see what the highest km will be. Cheers

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Talisker]

Related, but different - just like mass and density are related, but different.







Wrong.







Right.







Right.







Wrong. Heat and temperature are different. Higher combustion temperature, but it doesn't make anything run hotter, because the amount of heat is well within the engine's capacity to dissipate it.



You need to understand the difference between heat and temperature. A small campfire coal at 1000 degrees contains much less heat than a large lump of iron at 600 degrees. Higher temperature / less heat versus lower temperature / more heat.



Drop each into a bucket of water, and see what happens to the water temperature. The water can absorb a small amount of heat from a higher temperature source much more easily than it can absorb a large amount of heat from a lower temperature source.



Similar principle with an EGR delete - a small amount of heat from elevated combustion temperatures under light load, versus masses of heat from lower combustion temperatures under heavy load. The engine is designed to dissipate the heat under heavy load, and can easily cope with any extra heat under light load.



Heat and temperature are different.







Because it's not an issue. The engine is designed to cope with much more heat than will be generated by an EGR delete. Manufacturers would quite happily throw away all their EGR systems if they weren't required to meet emissions tests. EGR systems aren't required to manage engine heat dissipation.



Don't get me wrong here. I'm not advocating that people rush out to install EGR deletes. But this argument about increased combustion temperatures causing issues is wrong. Worrying about the combustion temperatures under light throttle conditions isn't a valid reason to avoid disabling EGR.



Worrying about NOx emissions might be.

I appreciate your comments.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[pharb]

Egr introduces inert gas (exhaust) into inlet manifold at light, low power or cruise throttle conditions to reduce combustion temperatures to reduce amount of NoX produced, with the resultant increase in soot, incompletely burnt fuel which then needs a DPF to catch.

Maximum combustion temperatures reached at maximum fuel conditions, or basicaly maximum throttle, maximum load, maximum boost. Under these conditions EGR is not operating, regardless of whether fully functional, blocked, or defeated.

If EGR was open all the timeit would be different, but it isn't. If it was required to be open all the time you wouldn't need an EGR valve. The manufacture could use another method such as just inlet reduction or similar to reduce combustion temperatures.

The use of variable exhaust gas recirculation allows the manufacture to tune the engine for minimum emisssions at cruise conditions whilst maintaining maximum power output at full throttle conditions.

[Muzza]

My old Pajero has now covered 280k plus, ( I still have contact with the owner), the EGR delete was done by me when the vehicle had less than 400km on it, the vehicle has towed a caravan thru out it’s life

[Garc]

I’ve done about 50K Km with the delete and 40K Kms with catch can on a car now with 239K Kms. I get about 100ml of oil from the catch can in 10K Kms.

[reciprovac]

Egr delete

This is not a debate about whether or not its good to defeat the egr function. I am simply interested to see how many KM,s people are running up with an without an EGR.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

2013 NW 75,000 km with SPC module,no problems at all.
Regards.