EGR valve

[MikeT 744]

If that is the first EGR to go in 160K, I would clean it out and be comforted that the pollution is being minimised with an operating EGR. NOx goes through the roof without EGR and NOx is a VERY potent greenhouse gas. Operating EGR also cools the combustion temperatures, so it is good for the engine.

[bilgladstone 13]

NOx goes through the roof without EGR

I await the day when someone does an actual tailpipe emissions test on a smart cdi to prove this out in the real world. Meantime, biodiesel (concentrate i.e. Milligan's) reduces GHG significantly.B

[MikeT 744]

Any car with a high compression ratio without EGR generates a lot of NOx. Diesel cars have VERY high compression ratios. Lubricity additives will not mitigate NOx. This is why EGR was first developed in the 1960s.Sounds like Bil is a NOx denier

[bilgladstone 13]

Sounds like Bil is a NOx denier

Nope. I deny the denial I have read the extended technical research papers from Milligan-Biotech and know that GHG emissions, including NOx are reduced up to 30% with its use.Milligan's is not simply a lubricity enhancer. It raises Cetane 10%, enhances combustion, reduces gaseous and particulate emissions, cleans injectors and other fuel system components, reduces engine wear, increases fuel mileage, AND tastes great and is less filling.OK... I haven't really tasted it. Edited June 30, 2010 by bilgladstone

[MikeT 744]

Assuming those Milligans claims are true (if they are, why doesn't our gov't require this marvel in ALL diesel fuels?), be aware that the smart's EGR reduces NOx by substantially more than Milligan's "up to" claims (lab tested by ECE and Transport Canada). I recall 90% being the figure I saw somewhere but I can't find the reference right now.

[zorancdi 0]

yes, limp mode is over This my version:THANK YOU CLUB SMART CAR FORUM !

[Ronfire 0]

now encase it in epoxy resin and it will never have a moisture problem

[bilgladstone 13]

Assuming those Milligans claims are true (if they are, why doesn't our gov't require this marvel in ALL diesel fuels?),

One assumes this is a rhetorical question, as you already know the an$wer.

be aware that the smart's EGR reduces NOx by substantially more than Milligan's "up to" claims (lab tested by ECE and Transport Canada). I recall 90% being the figure I saw somewhere but I can't find the reference right now.

This number depends entirely upon the EGR functioning at 100% spec. My skepticism continues wrt actual results as the EGR gets more and more loaded toward eventual failure.

Until we see the actual, real-world analysis of tailpipe emissions on a functioning cdi with, let's say, 25-30% carbon blockage of the EGR mix valve, we are left with pure speculation and surmise

[bilgladstone 13]

yes, limp mode is over This my version:THANK YOU CLUB SMART CAR FORUM !

Well done, mate!

[MikeT 744]

Until we see the actual, real-world analysis of tailpipe emissions on a functioning cdi with, let's say, 25-30% carbon blockage of the EGR mix valve, we are left with pure speculation and surmise[/b]

I would argue that until or unless the EGR is throwing tantrums (i.e. error codes), it is operating at as close to peak efficiency as is necessary to meet the emissions standards in force at the testing authorities (ECE, TC). That is a highly reasonable assumption if you think about it.

So, that being the case, if it ain't broke, your car is likely compliant with legislated NOx norms. If it's throwing codes, you are just as non-compliant as one would be with an EGR blanking plate.

[bilgladstone 13]

I would argue that until or unless the EGR is throwing tantrums (i.e. error codes), it is operating at as close to peak efficiency as is necessary to meet the emissions standards in force at the testing authorities (ECE, TC). That is a highly reasonable assumption if you think about it.

I guess we once again have to agree to disagree. I envision a curve of efficiency reduction from 100% pristine to 100% failure. I see no good reason to think that 30% of the clear mix orifice size works just as efficiently as 100%. That is entirely counter-intuitive.Without hard data we're simply assuming. And you know what that does to you and me Oh well...

[strawboss 5]

My car has started throwing p0401 codes at me recently.( egr malfunction)

Thanks to my SGII & this forum I'm not running off to the dealer with my chequebook in hand to have them solve this "problem", but now I'm stuck on the horns of a dilemma.

Do I block my valve off or clean it?

Why should I bother worrying when my provinces own emissions testing legislation allow a visual inspection (the smoke test) to pass or fail, if they don't care why should I, especially since on a passenger to mpg ratio with my little 800cc engine I am, in my opinion anyway, head & shoulders above the person commuting on the same trip solo in their huge gas powered crossover?

(Or the people in New Delhi driving 2 cycle powered total loss oil lubricated jitneys/cabs with their eye watering blue tinged exhaust?)

I'm going to clean it once & if within a year it goops up again I'm going to block it off & not worry about it.

And like F. Gump once said, "that's all I have to say about that"

edit to change miles to mpg

Edited July 1, 2010 by strawboss

[MikeT 744]

I guess we once again have to agree to disagree. I envision a curve of efficiency reduction from 100% pristine to 100% failure. I see no good reason to think that 30% of the clear mix orifice size works just as efficiently as 100%. That is entirely counter-intuitive.

Yes, and the device (given its ability to infinitely adjust flow so long as the needle is not sticking) would be capable of remaining well within emission spec for probably 70% of that range.No engineer would make a check engine light to celebrate Diwali, would one? Not bloody likely!MFRs have to certify cars to meet emissions spec for 130,000 km and 8 years. Anyone in Canada whose EGR is failing before 130K km ought to do the right thing and get it repaired free of charge at the dealer.I find it surprising to say the least that our resident Greenie would be so cavalier with GHGs, and look for all manner of sorry rationalisations to justify it!

[Huronlad 186]

The valve is sticking on my EGR on start-up. Hopefully I will get a chance in the next week to lubricate / clean it out. Does not throw a code when running, only on start-up from time to time.

[bilgladstone 13]

[zorancdi 0]

Now the only thing is to seal it in, to protect it from dust and water.If it wasn't for this 31 pages topic, I had to buy an new egr, and my mod was useless.Everybody

[Roger 0]

The GREAT and Mighty "Mike T" has spoken. "MFRs have to certify cars to meet emissions spec for 130,000 km and 8 years. Anyone in Canada whose EGR is failing before 130K km ought to do the right thing and get it repaired free of charge at the dealer." If your EGR has failed before 130,000 km and 8 years and you had to pay to get it fixed take your reciepts back in and get a refund. If they don't respect the law go to your MP if that does not get things moving the only thing left is a class action lawsuit .

[Speedie 4]

Mercedes has also improved the EGR valve from the initial ones we had on our cars (from 2005, 2006) - in fact a couple of times - think they are version 3 - they increased the passage sizes etc. and also have new software to cycle the EGR to prevent build ups - so if you have a bad 'un - definately worth getting fixed especially if it is for free - ours was done just a tad over 80k - and I have to say it is an improvement for performance (mileage) and less black smoke. Cheers,Cameron

[MikeT 744]

You betcha, and as I said 130K km and 8 years is the freebie period if you are having CEL issues.

[zorancdi 0]

sealed and connected:

[smartdriver 49]

sealed and connected:

Congratulations!You may have figured this out already, but you can plug the unused connector of your Merecedes cable into the EGR connector to minimize corrosion.Perhaps with all the modifications it now doesn't matter. Edited July 4, 2010 by smartdriver

[zorancdi 0]

Thank you, hope the pictures can help other people with solving egr problems.For now I am finished with the egr, next step (in the future) will be the complete removal of it.For the discussion about the envoriment:In the NL we have a soot test for the diesel engines.For cars till 31-06-2008 the K-value is limited on 3,0 for turbo engines and 2,5 non turbo, after 2008 is the max. 1,5.On my last MOT i got an 0,3 !!! K-Value for the soot, wih an plated egr.The NOx and CO2 Values are NO MOT points, so I can't get into problems.For Benzine cars built after 1993 the mot CO2 is 0,5 max.I don't know what is better for the eniroment: low NOx or low soot.Kind regards,Zoran

[MikeT 744]

NOx is a potent greenhouse gas, soot is a health risk. I don't think that engines with functioning EGR make more soot though.

[Ronfire 0]

I cant figure out how recycling the exhaust gas is better. The recycled gasses have less to no oxygen which is essential to combustion so would the car not run better and improved milage if we simply blocked off the ERG as well as keeping the intake system cleaner and intake temp lower ... I might be stupid but it makes sense to me...

[bilgladstone 13]

I cant figure out how recycling the exhaust gas is better. The recycled gasses have less to no oxygen which is essential to combustion so would the car not run better and improved milage if we simply blocked off the ERG as well as keeping the intake system cleaner and intake temp lower ... I might be stupid but it makes sense to me...

Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaust_gas_r..._diesel_enginesBil