@johntrebec OK guys lets get the facts straight - this system uses less than a 1% fuel penalty and the EPA has released studies showing the negative affects of PM on health - so trapping it, burning it and converting it to a gas is much safer.
Actually PM is unburned soot so this system complete the combusion process making it much more safe to breathe - albeit not as safe as having no diesel engines.
@johntrebec But I'm sure that ash is better than black smoke or they wouldn't be making these things mandatory. They cut down on more pollution then just carbon, I'm just using it as an example. Also don't forget, the filters don't draw power all the time, only for a few minutes to clean them selves. Hopefully I can find some real specific info on this stuff.
Thats true, it will require more power from the alternator which = more drag on the engine. However, diesels make plenty of torque so there would hardly be a difference even in fuel consumption. Furthermore, the exhaust gases are already very hot, so it wouldn't take a ridiculous amount of power to heat the filters. I would imagine it would definitely not be anything more than having headlights or fog lights on. I don't know specifically how better the ash is for the environment than carbon.
@master7chief,I know for a fact that the Ford 6.4's and Cummins 6.7's get about half the MPG of the previous diesels offered in them. the DPF burns fuel in the exhaust to raise exhaust temps to about 1100 deg. that no only burns extra fuel but also greatly shortens the life of the engine. The DPF reduces engine life, that means people will be buying new truck much more often and scraping the old ones early, What a waste of resourses, energy, money, and the environment. we also burn more fuel too
@123abcpa I'm wondering if that could also be the result of a different engine with the same displacement. Anyways, I think the injecting of fuel into the exhaust IS a waste of fuel, but also a bad design. From my understanding, DPFs don't always need to be hot as they are not continuously cleaning them self and are capable of doing so by using electricity to heat them self so why would they need the fuel injection? Finally, how will this shorten engine life if the high heat is downstream?
@master7chief, Its not really the heat that kills the engine (allthough i dont think it helps it) its the backpressure and soot buildup from the full filter that kills the turbo. its an expensive repair and can cause other damage as well.
@123abcpa I don't know how much back pressure these filters create but would be surprised if it were anything more than 1 or 2 psi. Even then, all that needs to be improved is the addition of more filters or lower the acceptable back pressure levels by burning it all off sooner. I believe as DPFs progress and become more widely used, they will improve in design but until then, we shouldn't just not use them. As of now, I feel the pros still far outweigh the cons.
@babineau00, True, but the build up from the DPF causes backpressure that causes the turbo to fail. The manufacture says its because the regen cycle was cut short by shuting the engine down before it was complete. They expect people to drive around so it can finnish, that waistes even more fuel and it will be dumping fuel into the exhaust thus waisting more just so it can clean itsself. I dont think it gets more wastefull then that. We are dumping fuel down the drain just so save on emissions.
@123abcpa First - these are not used on Trucks - those are passive systems mostly. Second, the whole reason for an active system is to avoid just what you're pointing out. We call it "pollute to control" and you're right it doesn't make sense to do that. Rypos Active systems avoid this condition.
@babineau00, my father had a 2008 dodge ram with the 6.7 cummins and it burned up 3 turbos in just 28,000 miles. whatever DPF was used on it destroyed the turbos and gave it an avg mpg of about 11.5mpg. the previous model cummins without the dpf was much higher (around 17avg) and was known for its reliablity.
@123abcpa The engine was clearly faulty, not the DPF. The problem with diesel engines is when people use stupid devices sold by so-called "tuning" companies. They increase pressure on the fuel rail causing lots of soot as the diesel burns in the manifold, DPF, EGR, turbo etc. It makes exhaust valves stick open too. What you describe is a major engine fault, nothing to do with having a DPF fitted. Stop using deliberately false rumours when you know nothing about engines or how they work.
@urbex2007,The truck wasSTOCKnot one aftermarket part other then seat covers and a bed liner. I know what iv seen in person and your an ignorant green ass hole,I have a degree fromSLCCin diesel mechanics so dont tell me i dont know anything about diesels.UTA buss system have new DPF buses and we have had to replace turbos on them many times.The drivers had to be trained to drive on the hiway before parking them so the stupid DPFs could clean themselfs costing more money and increased bus fairs.
@master7chief There are three types of systems - fuel injected, electrical regen and passive regen. Passive needs engine heat - so in some situations you need to run the engine very hot to get rid of soot and hold down backpressure - fuel injection uses fuel at a much greater rate than electric, and electric works in all conditions - will passively regen if the engine is running hot, and will electrical regen if the engine is running cool.
@babineau00 usually fun as im a mechanic, we had a 2.5 bmw on an 09 plate and wow, redline 2nd, 3rd and then 4th gear going down the M27... Corr you want power, noise and a thrill you try it!
@master7chief The ash is trapped in the filter, not passed through (there is something called blow-by which is a small amount going through the filter - but for the most part it's trapped). This type of filter is not used for trucks or cars. It's used on TRU's and Genset right now. But the TRU's are running on 12vots and yes, the alternator has to be beefed up, but the fuel penalty has been unmeasurable. Also, if the egine produces enough heat on it's own, then the Alt never gets used.
Just because some of you don't understand how this in the end reduces the total pollution doesn't mean this product is not as effective as claimed and proven to be. Especially because the people confused and claiming it doesn't work Are probably not the mechanical and CHEMICAL Engineers who designed this.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a diesel lover, and crave big power, but pumping black soot into the air does NOTHING for us..... or your engine. So whats the point in polluting so heavily?
@johntrebec Why are you talking like such an @** hole instead of debating facts? Yes it may cause fuel consumption to increase due to slight back pressure. With out knowing specifics, I'm confident it will cause no more than a 5% increase in fuel consumption. And you are arguing that that 5% increase is *more* than enough to *cancel out* the benefits of reduced pollution even though this filter removes 60-90% of PM? hhmm... When you attack people instead of facts, you sound very ignorant.
Please advice,i need to get my New V8 Land Cruiser Toyota Diesel Twin Turbo to Europe from Dubai,the one think i need is how and were can i instol the Particular Filter for my car to make it en order with the EU regulation, and if you have any idea about the cost
@johntrebec OK guys lets get the facts straight - this system uses less than a 1% fuel penalty and the EPA has released studies showing the negative affects of PM on health - so trapping it, burning it and converting it to a gas is much safer.
babineau00 1 year ago
@johntrebec
Actually PM is unburned soot so this system complete the combusion process making it much more safe to breathe - albeit not as safe as having no diesel engines.
babineau00 1 year ago
@johntrebec But I'm sure that ash is better than black smoke or they wouldn't be making these things mandatory. They cut down on more pollution then just carbon, I'm just using it as an example. Also don't forget, the filters don't draw power all the time, only for a few minutes to clean them selves. Hopefully I can find some real specific info on this stuff.
master7chief 1 year ago
Thats true, it will require more power from the alternator which = more drag on the engine. However, diesels make plenty of torque so there would hardly be a difference even in fuel consumption. Furthermore, the exhaust gases are already very hot, so it wouldn't take a ridiculous amount of power to heat the filters. I would imagine it would definitely not be anything more than having headlights or fog lights on. I don't know specifically how better the ash is for the environment than carbon.
master7chief 1 year ago
@master7chief,I know for a fact that the Ford 6.4's and Cummins 6.7's get about half the MPG of the previous diesels offered in them. the DPF burns fuel in the exhaust to raise exhaust temps to about 1100 deg. that no only burns extra fuel but also greatly shortens the life of the engine. The DPF reduces engine life, that means people will be buying new truck much more often and scraping the old ones early, What a waste of resourses, energy, money, and the environment. we also burn more fuel too
123abcpa 1 year ago
@123abcpa I'm wondering if that could also be the result of a different engine with the same displacement. Anyways, I think the injecting of fuel into the exhaust IS a waste of fuel, but also a bad design. From my understanding, DPFs don't always need to be hot as they are not continuously cleaning them self and are capable of doing so by using electricity to heat them self so why would they need the fuel injection? Finally, how will this shorten engine life if the high heat is downstream?
master7chief 1 year ago
@master7chief, Its not really the heat that kills the engine (allthough i dont think it helps it) its the backpressure and soot buildup from the full filter that kills the turbo. its an expensive repair and can cause other damage as well.
123abcpa 1 year ago
@123abcpa I don't know how much back pressure these filters create but would be surprised if it were anything more than 1 or 2 psi. Even then, all that needs to be improved is the addition of more filters or lower the acceptable back pressure levels by burning it all off sooner. I believe as DPFs progress and become more widely used, they will improve in design but until then, we shouldn't just not use them. As of now, I feel the pros still far outweigh the cons.
master7chief 1 year ago
@123abcpa These don't add heat to the engine as they are on the exhaust side.
babineau00 1 year ago
@babineau00, True, but the build up from the DPF causes backpressure that causes the turbo to fail. The manufacture says its because the regen cycle was cut short by shuting the engine down before it was complete. They expect people to drive around so it can finnish, that waistes even more fuel and it will be dumping fuel into the exhaust thus waisting more just so it can clean itsself. I dont think it gets more wastefull then that. We are dumping fuel down the drain just so save on emissions.
123abcpa 1 year ago
@123abcpa First - these are not used on Trucks - those are passive systems mostly. Second, the whole reason for an active system is to avoid just what you're pointing out. We call it "pollute to control" and you're right it doesn't make sense to do that. Rypos Active systems avoid this condition.
babineau00 1 year ago
@babineau00, my father had a 2008 dodge ram with the 6.7 cummins and it burned up 3 turbos in just 28,000 miles. whatever DPF was used on it destroyed the turbos and gave it an avg mpg of about 11.5mpg. the previous model cummins without the dpf was much higher (around 17avg) and was known for its reliablity.
123abcpa 1 year ago
@123abcpa The engine was clearly faulty, not the DPF. The problem with diesel engines is when people use stupid devices sold by so-called "tuning" companies. They increase pressure on the fuel rail causing lots of soot as the diesel burns in the manifold, DPF, EGR, turbo etc. It makes exhaust valves stick open too. What you describe is a major engine fault, nothing to do with having a DPF fitted. Stop using deliberately false rumours when you know nothing about engines or how they work.
urbex2007 11 months ago
@urbex2007,The truck wasSTOCKnot one aftermarket part other then seat covers and a bed liner. I know what iv seen in person and your an ignorant green ass hole,I have a degree fromSLCCin diesel mechanics so dont tell me i dont know anything about diesels.UTA buss system have new DPF buses and we have had to replace turbos on them many times.The drivers had to be trained to drive on the hiway before parking them so the stupid DPFs could clean themselfs costing more money and increased bus fairs.
123abcpa 11 months ago
@master7chief There are three types of systems - fuel injected, electrical regen and passive regen. Passive needs engine heat - so in some situations you need to run the engine very hot to get rid of soot and hold down backpressure - fuel injection uses fuel at a much greater rate than electric, and electric works in all conditions - will passively regen if the engine is running hot, and will electrical regen if the engine is running cool.
babineau00 1 year ago
@babineau00 usually fun as im a mechanic, we had a 2.5 bmw on an 09 plate and wow, redline 2nd, 3rd and then 4th gear going down the M27... Corr you want power, noise and a thrill you try it!
mattbarca89 1 year ago
@master7chief The ash is trapped in the filter, not passed through (there is something called blow-by which is a small amount going through the filter - but for the most part it's trapped). This type of filter is not used for trucks or cars. It's used on TRU's and Genset right now. But the TRU's are running on 12vots and yes, the alternator has to be beefed up, but the fuel penalty has been unmeasurable. Also, if the egine produces enough heat on it's own, then the Alt never gets used.
babineau00 1 year ago
@babineau00 Wow, all of that is really cool.
master7chief 1 year ago
Just because some of you don't understand how this in the end reduces the total pollution doesn't mean this product is not as effective as claimed and proven to be. Especially because the people confused and claiming it doesn't work Are probably not the mechanical and CHEMICAL Engineers who designed this.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a diesel lover, and crave big power, but pumping black soot into the air does NOTHING for us..... or your engine. So whats the point in polluting so heavily?
master7chief 1 year ago
@johntrebec Why are you talking like such an @** hole instead of debating facts? Yes it may cause fuel consumption to increase due to slight back pressure. With out knowing specifics, I'm confident it will cause no more than a 5% increase in fuel consumption. And you are arguing that that 5% increase is *more* than enough to *cancel out* the benefits of reduced pollution even though this filter removes 60-90% of PM? hhmm... When you attack people instead of facts, you sound very ignorant.
master7chief 1 year ago
Interesting technique.
Vycatocom 1 year ago
when you burn the soot off. what happens to the soot?? is it made neutral? or does it really make a zero sum game?? someone please do tell.
circusboy90210 1 year ago
of corse if you just drive properly and let the engine warm up you dont need any of this.
proberly quite handy for people useing it for short journeys an stop start i guess.
monkeyswithcameras 2 years ago
I see why they do this, but the black smoke is soot which is very good for the enviroment
TheMuffinMan1080 2 years ago
y would u want to put one on it anyway? use more fuel and lower engine power
WARD5KUSTOMZ 2 years ago
Please advice,i need to get my New V8 Land Cruiser Toyota Diesel Twin Turbo to Europe from Dubai,the one think i need is how and were can i instol the Particular Filter for my car to make it en order with the EU regulation, and if you have any idea about the cost
calypsocalypso1 3 years ago
looks nice
romeuchumbo 3 years ago