-
TDR Magazine subscribers receive more than the magazine! You also gain additional forum privileges!
Details here: TDR Privileges
Subscribe to TDR Magazine here: https://www.tdr-online.com/
egr question
- Thread starter NSperduto
- Start Date
Attention: TDR Forum Junkies To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.
Thanks, TDR Staff
- Status
EGR stand for exhaust gas recirculation. Basically the EGR trucks will "recycle" some of the exhaust back into the engine to help with emissions. IMHO It can't be better for an engine to have dirty diesel exhaust going through the intake system as opposed to straight fresh air. If you plan on ordering a truck do it now.
It doesn't seem to me, after reading all the posts on this subject, that anyone really knows what the Cummins EGR set-up will be like or how detrimental it will be on performance, etc. There has been much speculation, mostly negative about it. The 24 valve and the Common Rail Injection were also victems of the naysayers, and, for my money, they were wrong. It is hard for me to believe that Cummins would put it's name on a system that hasn't been tested thoroughly. All that being said, I am glad I bought an '03
.
Dean
. Dean
The only credible arguments I've seen against EGR is the fact that we do not yet have low-sulfur #2 in this country, and that means greater potential for intake clogging like the TDIs. If you wait long enough someone will post a picture of that. The Cummins EGR system has only been in production for a year or so in this country (Motorhomes and busses) so we don't have enough data to know if we will see TDI-like intakes. Even given the TDI issue, it remains to be seen if the Cummins system will be that bad. I expect not. We do know that Cummins EGR ISB engines have been in production use in Europe for almost 4 years now, and we haven't heard of any intake-clogging problems. But Europe is a very diesel-freindly continent, and they have ultra low sulfur fuel (meaning less soot and less intake clogging). If we get the same EGR technology in january as used in Europe today, all I can say is "intake clogging will be more of an issue". more than what? who knows.
that aside, I still don't think EGR will make the sky fall in. The only downsides for stock trucks are (1) more cooling capacity is requried and, (2) heavier load on the oil. that means shorter drain intervals and/or better oil, and bigger radiators perhaps. no real big deal there, especially for joe stock truck.
The ISB platform itself has plenty to give in the HP department, so whatever power penalty EGR imposes can be made up, imho. That means I'm betting the new engines will be just as powerful as todays engines. After all, they're coming with variable geometry turbos, which is part of the technology used to make up for EGR losses. From Cummins' statements it doesn't look like fuel economy will suffer.
For those expecting to bomb, I think the HP upgrades will be more difficult and more expensive. HP requires fuel + oxygen and if you dillute the air intake you won't make as much HP. nuff said. Also, I expect the feds to get real nasty and it may become illegal to run fueling boxes in the future, especialy if the fueling box "tampers" with EGR (via the ECM). After all, starting January 04 the federal EPA regs equal the CA regs. Fueling box development for the new EGR trucks will probably be available (they are for the Fords, which have both EGR and variable geometry turbo), but perhaps delayed and/or more expensive. Pressure-only boxes like the Edge EZ might work right off the shelf, who knows.
Philosophically, you may or may not agree with the imposition of EGR by the feds, the EPA's influence on the technology used to acheive emissions standards, etc. you may not agree with low-altitude Ozone being a hazzard, which is a byproduct of NOx(which EGR reduces) and sunlight and (unfortunately) does not rise or improve the high altitude ozone layer.
From a mechanical sense, you might not want the increased complexity of EGR/VGT, as well as the increasing supervision from the feds on your truck, including local inspections, smoke police, etc.
Just some thoughts for discussion...
-- doug
that aside, I still don't think EGR will make the sky fall in. The only downsides for stock trucks are (1) more cooling capacity is requried and, (2) heavier load on the oil. that means shorter drain intervals and/or better oil, and bigger radiators perhaps. no real big deal there, especially for joe stock truck.
The ISB platform itself has plenty to give in the HP department, so whatever power penalty EGR imposes can be made up, imho. That means I'm betting the new engines will be just as powerful as todays engines. After all, they're coming with variable geometry turbos, which is part of the technology used to make up for EGR losses. From Cummins' statements it doesn't look like fuel economy will suffer.
For those expecting to bomb, I think the HP upgrades will be more difficult and more expensive. HP requires fuel + oxygen and if you dillute the air intake you won't make as much HP. nuff said. Also, I expect the feds to get real nasty and it may become illegal to run fueling boxes in the future, especialy if the fueling box "tampers" with EGR (via the ECM). After all, starting January 04 the federal EPA regs equal the CA regs. Fueling box development for the new EGR trucks will probably be available (they are for the Fords, which have both EGR and variable geometry turbo), but perhaps delayed and/or more expensive. Pressure-only boxes like the Edge EZ might work right off the shelf, who knows.
Philosophically, you may or may not agree with the imposition of EGR by the feds, the EPA's influence on the technology used to acheive emissions standards, etc. you may not agree with low-altitude Ozone being a hazzard, which is a byproduct of NOx(which EGR reduces) and sunlight and (unfortunately) does not rise or improve the high altitude ozone layer.
From a mechanical sense, you might not want the increased complexity of EGR/VGT, as well as the increasing supervision from the feds on your truck, including local inspections, smoke police, etc.
Just some thoughts for discussion...
-- doug
I have a 97 Calif CTD. It came with an EGR. Federal version auto trans were rated 180/440 hp/torque and Calif was 160/420. When I did the Banks twin ram the egr got lost some how so an ATS exh manifold was needed. The intake was about half full of soot when I did the swap. The Vac ports were plugged, used a shop vac to clean.
The problem is the EGR was an add-on and the engine and controls were not designed to work with an EGR. The same thing happened during the mid 70s when EGR was put on gas engines. Absolute destruction of driveability and power/economy.
With the PCMs used since late 80s and engines designed for emission EGRs aren't a problem. The engine controls on the CTD now and in the future will benefit from what was learned. the EGR adds exhaust gas, an inert gas, to the intake to reduce combustion temps and NOx emission. Properly integrated it actually is a good thing for an engine, like a closed vent crankcase.
The problem is the EGR was an add-on and the engine and controls were not designed to work with an EGR. The same thing happened during the mid 70s when EGR was put on gas engines. Absolute destruction of driveability and power/economy.
With the PCMs used since late 80s and engines designed for emission EGRs aren't a problem. The engine controls on the CTD now and in the future will benefit from what was learned. the EGR adds exhaust gas, an inert gas, to the intake to reduce combustion temps and NOx emission. Properly integrated it actually is a good thing for an engine, like a closed vent crankcase.
Having described how I dont' think EGR will make the sky fall in, I won't go as far as saying that it is good for the engine. The argument against "EGR is good for the engine" depends on what your measurement of "good" is. Seriously. If "good" means a reduction in NOx, then yup, its good. But this "goodness" comes at a price:
* lower fuel economy. all other things equal the EGR engine will have poorer fuel economy. In the case of the 04 CTDs not all things are equal -- they've made up the difference with new turbo technology. to bad we couldn't have the new turbo technology w/o EGR. what an animal that would have been.
* lower power output. all other things equal, the EGR engine will produce less power. In the case of the 04 CTDs, not all things are equal and they can make up the difference. who knows, with VGT they can play some ratings games and might come out looking better on paper.
* much higher stress/load on the oil. so the feds don't want to spew gunk out the tailpipe -- they want it in the oil instead. oil drain intervals are half
* higher heat dissipation required. more expensive 'cause you have to have a bigger radiator (I think. not confirmed if the 04s acutally do or if they take up more of the built in margin) and a separate heat exchanger to cool the recirculated gas.
* higher susceptability to intake clogging. other things equal, the EGR engine will condense soot on the intake. that won't be addressed until we get ULSD. 2007 I hear?
* as I mentioned before, more difficult and more expensive to performance modify. that may or may not be important to some.
by the way, there are ways to deal with NOx other than EGR. Only the EPA was not in favor of them becasuse they can be defeated (post combustion treatment). Also, EGR in diesels has never (I don't believe) been persued as an engineering effort to do something "good" for the engine -- like make it run better, more efficiently, better response, more power, more reliably, higher durability, the things that we buy engines for the directly benefit us. In those terms, EGR is a resounding "not good for the engine". In reality, EGR is around to meet a set of goals entirely removed from whats "good" for the engine. in my opinion, it isn't good for the engine at all. EGR does not allow the engine to do any of the things we need engines to do (perform mechanical work) better. Niether does it benefit the consumer (directly) -- it makes everything consumers have to deal with (maintenance) in exchange for what the engine does for us (mechanical work) either more effort and/or more expensive. its only purpose is to benefit the environment, which of course benefits us indirectly but may not even be a practical advantage in some locales (notably those w/o a smog problem and also without a low-altitude ozone problem)
* lower fuel economy. all other things equal the EGR engine will have poorer fuel economy. In the case of the 04 CTDs not all things are equal -- they've made up the difference with new turbo technology. to bad we couldn't have the new turbo technology w/o EGR. what an animal that would have been.
* lower power output. all other things equal, the EGR engine will produce less power. In the case of the 04 CTDs, not all things are equal and they can make up the difference. who knows, with VGT they can play some ratings games and might come out looking better on paper.
* much higher stress/load on the oil. so the feds don't want to spew gunk out the tailpipe -- they want it in the oil instead. oil drain intervals are half
* higher heat dissipation required. more expensive 'cause you have to have a bigger radiator (I think. not confirmed if the 04s acutally do or if they take up more of the built in margin) and a separate heat exchanger to cool the recirculated gas.
* higher susceptability to intake clogging. other things equal, the EGR engine will condense soot on the intake. that won't be addressed until we get ULSD. 2007 I hear?
* as I mentioned before, more difficult and more expensive to performance modify. that may or may not be important to some.
by the way, there are ways to deal with NOx other than EGR. Only the EPA was not in favor of them becasuse they can be defeated (post combustion treatment). Also, EGR in diesels has never (I don't believe) been persued as an engineering effort to do something "good" for the engine -- like make it run better, more efficiently, better response, more power, more reliably, higher durability, the things that we buy engines for the directly benefit us. In those terms, EGR is a resounding "not good for the engine". In reality, EGR is around to meet a set of goals entirely removed from whats "good" for the engine. in my opinion, it isn't good for the engine at all. EGR does not allow the engine to do any of the things we need engines to do (perform mechanical work) better. Niether does it benefit the consumer (directly) -- it makes everything consumers have to deal with (maintenance) in exchange for what the engine does for us (mechanical work) either more effort and/or more expensive. its only purpose is to benefit the environment, which of course benefits us indirectly but may not even be a practical advantage in some locales (notably those w/o a smog problem and also without a low-altitude ozone problem)
Most of these arguments are based on problems With the egr system when first installed on cars, 1972 in Cal and 1975 the rest of the country and the couple of years on the CTD in Calif. EGR was full on when the engine warmed up and shut down during WOT or low vac-heavy load. Enter electronic engine management. A feedback circuit, O2 sensors, and the other measured parameters are used to control the ammount of exhaust gas put in the intake. EGRs are mostly stepped today. The 24 valve Cummins was step one in getting ECMs for diesels, the 03 are the next step.
* lower fuel economy. all other things equal the EGR engine will have poorer fuel economy. In the case of the 04 CTDs not all things are equal -- they've made up the difference with new turbo technology. to bad we couldn't have the new turbo technology w/o EGR. what an animal that would have been.
>Modern cars with egr get better gas milage, look at the power and economy of a Corvette.
* lower power output. all other things equal, the EGR engine will produce less power. In the case of the 04 CTDs, not all things are equal and they can make up the difference. who knows, with VGT they can play some ratings games and might come out looking better on paper.
>Corvette or any newer car. Hopped up rice burners. The egr is controlled.
* much higher stress/load on the oil. so the feds don't want to spew gunk out the tailpipe -- they want it in the oil instead. oil drain intervals are half
>No change, in fact tearing into a newer engine it is amazing how clean they are. When I did smog inspections most cars had well over 100k miles, several 200K+
* higher heat dissipation required. more expensive 'cause you have to have a bigger radiator (I think. not confirmed if the 04s acutally do or if they take up more of the built in margin) and a separate heat exchanger to cool the recirculated gas.
> EGR is on at cruise only and it lowers combustion temps. It's all about Physics
* higher susceptability to intake clogging. other things equal, the EGR engine will condense soot on the intake. that won't be addressed until we get ULSD. 2007 I hear?
>This is true, especially with a diesel. Using a cooled egr allows for soot to be removed. Will work okay with the low sulphur fuels. Until then might have to have another filter.
* as I mentioned before, more difficult and more expensive to performance modify. that may or may not be important to some.
> The Hemi will have a PCM from Mopar increasing HP to 400+ and cost about 350 to 400 dollars. It is easier to pump up the 24 valve CTDs since a box can be put in to modify the engine parameters. The 03 will have boxes soon. Ever had your doors blown off by a 400HP Honda Civic?
by the way, there are ways to deal with NOx other than EGR. Only the EPA was not in favor of them becasuse they can be defeated (post combustion treatment). Also, EGR in diesels has never (I don't believe) been persued as an engineering effort to do something "good" for the engine -- like make it run better, more efficiently, better response, more power, more reliably, higher durability, the things that we buy engines for the directly benefit us. In those terms, EGR is a resounding "not good for the engine". In reality, EGR is around to meet a set of goals entirely removed from whats "good" for the engine. in my opinion, it isn't good for the engine at all. EGR does not allow the engine to do any of the things we need engines to do (perform mechanical work) better. Niether does it benefit the consumer (directly) -- it makes everything consumers have to deal with (maintenance) in exchange for what the engine does for us (mechanical work) either more effort and/or more expensive. its only purpose is to benefit the environment, which of course benefits us indirectly but may not even be a practical advantage in some locales (notably those w/o a smog problem and also without a low-altitude ozone problem) > most of this is not true, egr valves can cost $100 plus, but egr dosen't hurt an engine at all!
The other way will be used, a CAT. There are no places in the US where people are smog free, the level is related to the population and climate. The modern engine management turns on the EGR when the engine is at running temp, not at idle, not WOT, not under heavy load. Mostly between 45 and whatever. When it is stepped on you are typically cruising on the open road. If the engine is leaned out to much it is backed off. It does lower combustion temps and reduces exhaust temp. Federal law requires emmission systems to be warranty repair items for 7yrs or 70,000 miles.
Engine perfomance is my bag, got a degree in auto technology-engine performance in 95 from SJSU. Love the stuff. Am A computer guy, 35 yrs, who loves tinkering with cars. The electronics is the esy part of new cars. EGR is not a destroyer, when the system is engineered right it maintains a constant, safe combustion temp. Problems to date with the 24 valve CTDs is mostly traceable to what DC adds.
* lower fuel economy. all other things equal the EGR engine will have poorer fuel economy. In the case of the 04 CTDs not all things are equal -- they've made up the difference with new turbo technology. to bad we couldn't have the new turbo technology w/o EGR. what an animal that would have been.
>Modern cars with egr get better gas milage, look at the power and economy of a Corvette.
* lower power output. all other things equal, the EGR engine will produce less power. In the case of the 04 CTDs, not all things are equal and they can make up the difference. who knows, with VGT they can play some ratings games and might come out looking better on paper.
>Corvette or any newer car. Hopped up rice burners. The egr is controlled.
* much higher stress/load on the oil. so the feds don't want to spew gunk out the tailpipe -- they want it in the oil instead. oil drain intervals are half
>No change, in fact tearing into a newer engine it is amazing how clean they are. When I did smog inspections most cars had well over 100k miles, several 200K+
* higher heat dissipation required. more expensive 'cause you have to have a bigger radiator (I think. not confirmed if the 04s acutally do or if they take up more of the built in margin) and a separate heat exchanger to cool the recirculated gas.
> EGR is on at cruise only and it lowers combustion temps. It's all about Physics
* higher susceptability to intake clogging. other things equal, the EGR engine will condense soot on the intake. that won't be addressed until we get ULSD. 2007 I hear?
>This is true, especially with a diesel. Using a cooled egr allows for soot to be removed. Will work okay with the low sulphur fuels. Until then might have to have another filter.
* as I mentioned before, more difficult and more expensive to performance modify. that may or may not be important to some.
> The Hemi will have a PCM from Mopar increasing HP to 400+ and cost about 350 to 400 dollars. It is easier to pump up the 24 valve CTDs since a box can be put in to modify the engine parameters. The 03 will have boxes soon. Ever had your doors blown off by a 400HP Honda Civic?
by the way, there are ways to deal with NOx other than EGR. Only the EPA was not in favor of them becasuse they can be defeated (post combustion treatment). Also, EGR in diesels has never (I don't believe) been persued as an engineering effort to do something "good" for the engine -- like make it run better, more efficiently, better response, more power, more reliably, higher durability, the things that we buy engines for the directly benefit us. In those terms, EGR is a resounding "not good for the engine". In reality, EGR is around to meet a set of goals entirely removed from whats "good" for the engine. in my opinion, it isn't good for the engine at all. EGR does not allow the engine to do any of the things we need engines to do (perform mechanical work) better. Niether does it benefit the consumer (directly) -- it makes everything consumers have to deal with (maintenance) in exchange for what the engine does for us (mechanical work) either more effort and/or more expensive. its only purpose is to benefit the environment, which of course benefits us indirectly but may not even be a practical advantage in some locales (notably those w/o a smog problem and also without a low-altitude ozone problem) > most of this is not true, egr valves can cost $100 plus, but egr dosen't hurt an engine at all!
The other way will be used, a CAT. There are no places in the US where people are smog free, the level is related to the population and climate. The modern engine management turns on the EGR when the engine is at running temp, not at idle, not WOT, not under heavy load. Mostly between 45 and whatever. When it is stepped on you are typically cruising on the open road. If the engine is leaned out to much it is backed off. It does lower combustion temps and reduces exhaust temp. Federal law requires emmission systems to be warranty repair items for 7yrs or 70,000 miles.
Engine perfomance is my bag, got a degree in auto technology-engine performance in 95 from SJSU. Love the stuff. Am A computer guy, 35 yrs, who loves tinkering with cars. The electronics is the esy part of new cars. EGR is not a destroyer, when the system is engineered right it maintains a constant, safe combustion temp. Problems to date with the 24 valve CTDs is mostly traceable to what DC adds.
<Most of these arguments are based on problems With the egr <system when first installed on cars.
I was basing my comments, not on decades-old perfected gasser technology, but on CTD-specific reading on the net, some from cummins, and some reasoning in between the lines. A lot of the arguments in favor of EGR come from broad generalities associated with successes in gas engines, where the details are different and the technology has matured for decades. Not all of that applies to the CTD engines available today. I'm out to be specific to the difference between todays CTD and the ones introduced to meet January, 2004 EPA regs, which at that time will equal the CA regs.
>Modern cars with egr get better gas milage, look at the power >and economy of a Corvette.
no argument there, but that doesn't help us understand the impact of EGR in the CTD this year, nor does it establish that EGR itself is a significant driver to fuel economy on otherwise identical engine platforms. The power and economy of the 'Vette is not because of EGR...
>No change, in fact tearing into a newer engine it is amazing how >clean they are. When I did smog inspections most cars had well >over 100k miles, several 200K+
I don't consider doubling the oil drain rate as a 'no change'. I'll leave it as an exercise to research the increased load on oil in the CTD with EGR and in particular the shortened drain interval in the 2004. 5 models as a result. A recent TDR magazine will be most helpful in that regard.
> EGR is on at cruise only and it lowers combustion temps. It's all > about Physics
no argument there. However, cooled EGR on the CTD does require a separate heat exchanger. I don't recall at the moment where I read about a higher aggregate heat load on the engine, so I'll raise the question this way: in the CTD (that is, 04 non-EGR compared to 04. 5 EGR, and for the same torque output at the same rpm, what role does the introduction of additional heat energy from recirculated exhaust (cooled, but still hotter than cold air intake) play in controlling coolant temperature?
* as I mentioned before, more difficult and more expensive to performance modify. that may or may not be important to some.
> The Hemi will have a PCM from Mopar increasing HP to 400+
> and cost about 350 to 400 dollars.
The Hemi doesn't have a variable geometry turbocharger, we've never seen a non-EGR version of the current Hemi engine, and the example doesn't tell us anything about performance modifications to the 2004. 5 CTD.
>It is easier to pump up the 24 valve CTDs since a box can be put >in to modify the engine parameters.
The EGR 24v CTDs will be more difficult to pump up than the non-EGR CTDs because there is more for the box to deal with. more R&D will be spent on fueling boxes beyond what has already been spent on boxes for the early 3rd gens. Emissions regs will make it more difficult to do it legally.
>The 03 will have boxes soon.
and they won't work on the 04 EGR engines. The current work on 03 boxes has not yet addressed the particulars of the CTD EGR engine, especially the VGT. Some leverage will proably be obtained from the Ford boxes, and this may help speed the introduction, but the presense of 03 boxes says nothing about the expected availability of 04. 5 boxes. They are different animals.
>Ever had your doors blown off by a 400HP Honda Civic?
never seen a EGR CTD Civic. [laugh] Does honda use variable geometry turbocharger in the Civic?
> most of this is not true, egr valves can cost $100 plus, but egr >dosen't hurt an engine at all!
The complexity of EGR goes beyond the valve itself and most of us run our engines beyond 70,000 miles or whatever the EPA emissions warranty period it.
I consider the increased load on the oil and the potential for soot-clogged intake, etc. to be hurtful. Beyond that, however, I never said that EGR "hurts" the engine. In fact, I said that for joe stock engine it will largely be a don't care. The important difference between the 2004 and the 2004. 5 CTDs is that the introduction of EGR to the CTD does not allow it to give more of what we expect it to do for us. Furthermore, it is environmentally, not peformance motivated. It is more expensive to build, more expensive to maintain and doesn't improve the way our trucks drive or pull.
> The other way will be used, a CAT.
Well, the CAT to my knowledge will not be used as a replacement for EGR on CTDs sold in the US. too bad too, as NOx can be controlled without touching the engine. Certainly, a more traditional CAT may be used in conjunction with EGR on the CTDs. In my post I mentioned post-combution techniques in general to highlight that the EPA has lobbied against such techniques because they can be defeated easily by simply not renewing the reactive agent requried to effectively neutralize NOx in the tailpipe.
>There are no places in the US where people are smog free, the > level is related to the population and climate.
there are locales where measured smog or low-altitude ozone levals are not near accepted thresholds, where the number of excursions (above those thresholds) per year is not an issue, and that do not test for the lower NOx levels.
I was basing my comments, not on decades-old perfected gasser technology, but on CTD-specific reading on the net, some from cummins, and some reasoning in between the lines. A lot of the arguments in favor of EGR come from broad generalities associated with successes in gas engines, where the details are different and the technology has matured for decades. Not all of that applies to the CTD engines available today. I'm out to be specific to the difference between todays CTD and the ones introduced to meet January, 2004 EPA regs, which at that time will equal the CA regs.
>Modern cars with egr get better gas milage, look at the power >and economy of a Corvette.
no argument there, but that doesn't help us understand the impact of EGR in the CTD this year, nor does it establish that EGR itself is a significant driver to fuel economy on otherwise identical engine platforms. The power and economy of the 'Vette is not because of EGR...
>No change, in fact tearing into a newer engine it is amazing how >clean they are. When I did smog inspections most cars had well >over 100k miles, several 200K+
I don't consider doubling the oil drain rate as a 'no change'. I'll leave it as an exercise to research the increased load on oil in the CTD with EGR and in particular the shortened drain interval in the 2004. 5 models as a result. A recent TDR magazine will be most helpful in that regard.
> EGR is on at cruise only and it lowers combustion temps. It's all > about Physics
no argument there. However, cooled EGR on the CTD does require a separate heat exchanger. I don't recall at the moment where I read about a higher aggregate heat load on the engine, so I'll raise the question this way: in the CTD (that is, 04 non-EGR compared to 04. 5 EGR, and for the same torque output at the same rpm, what role does the introduction of additional heat energy from recirculated exhaust (cooled, but still hotter than cold air intake) play in controlling coolant temperature?
* as I mentioned before, more difficult and more expensive to performance modify. that may or may not be important to some.
> The Hemi will have a PCM from Mopar increasing HP to 400+
> and cost about 350 to 400 dollars.
The Hemi doesn't have a variable geometry turbocharger, we've never seen a non-EGR version of the current Hemi engine, and the example doesn't tell us anything about performance modifications to the 2004. 5 CTD.
>It is easier to pump up the 24 valve CTDs since a box can be put >in to modify the engine parameters.
The EGR 24v CTDs will be more difficult to pump up than the non-EGR CTDs because there is more for the box to deal with. more R&D will be spent on fueling boxes beyond what has already been spent on boxes for the early 3rd gens. Emissions regs will make it more difficult to do it legally.
>The 03 will have boxes soon.
and they won't work on the 04 EGR engines. The current work on 03 boxes has not yet addressed the particulars of the CTD EGR engine, especially the VGT. Some leverage will proably be obtained from the Ford boxes, and this may help speed the introduction, but the presense of 03 boxes says nothing about the expected availability of 04. 5 boxes. They are different animals.
>Ever had your doors blown off by a 400HP Honda Civic?
never seen a EGR CTD Civic. [laugh] Does honda use variable geometry turbocharger in the Civic?
> most of this is not true, egr valves can cost $100 plus, but egr >dosen't hurt an engine at all!
The complexity of EGR goes beyond the valve itself and most of us run our engines beyond 70,000 miles or whatever the EPA emissions warranty period it.
I consider the increased load on the oil and the potential for soot-clogged intake, etc. to be hurtful. Beyond that, however, I never said that EGR "hurts" the engine. In fact, I said that for joe stock engine it will largely be a don't care. The important difference between the 2004 and the 2004. 5 CTDs is that the introduction of EGR to the CTD does not allow it to give more of what we expect it to do for us. Furthermore, it is environmentally, not peformance motivated. It is more expensive to build, more expensive to maintain and doesn't improve the way our trucks drive or pull.
> The other way will be used, a CAT.
Well, the CAT to my knowledge will not be used as a replacement for EGR on CTDs sold in the US. too bad too, as NOx can be controlled without touching the engine. Certainly, a more traditional CAT may be used in conjunction with EGR on the CTDs. In my post I mentioned post-combution techniques in general to highlight that the EPA has lobbied against such techniques because they can be defeated easily by simply not renewing the reactive agent requried to effectively neutralize NOx in the tailpipe.
>There are no places in the US where people are smog free, the > level is related to the population and climate.
there are locales where measured smog or low-altitude ozone levals are not near accepted thresholds, where the number of excursions (above those thresholds) per year is not an issue, and that do not test for the lower NOx levels.
egr not a done deal
I talked to a Cummins engineer at length at the SEMA show in Vegas and he was very tight-lipped about it... . but said there is a very good chance that egr will NOT be used in Jan '04. He went so far as to say Cummins has found another way of dealing with the EPA requirements that at the time were proving very successful. He just could not give any details as to what is was. At any rate, I walked away feeling more like there would not be egr than there would be. There is definitely hope.
I talked to a Cummins engineer at length at the SEMA show in Vegas and he was very tight-lipped about it... . but said there is a very good chance that egr will NOT be used in Jan '04. He went so far as to say Cummins has found another way of dealing with the EPA requirements that at the time were proving very successful. He just could not give any details as to what is was. At any rate, I walked away feeling more like there would not be egr than there would be. There is definitely hope.
boy, would that ever shock the CTD community. It may be fun to speculate, and most of us read the available information and conclude that EGR is coming, but we gotta wait and see. What fun that will be to watch the e-boards as people open their 2004. 5 hoods and report what they see. And it will be just as much fun to evaluate the actual service life and maintenance of the engine against all the speculation. I'm hoping the TDR people will have comments soon in the next couple of mags. when the first engines hit the street, then hopefully the floodgates, press releases, and useful information will be available.
- Status
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
Turbo Diesel Register
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
