Why was fuel in the past better quality?

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by EF_6

This is why most deisels now run 'diesel particulate filters' in the exhaust system which are sort of like a cat convertor but for diesels.

Get your facts right, all new diesels do have cats..... dpf is another story & very few Australian diesels have them.

[Jastel]

Yep varnish only left.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by trublu

Not surprised, after all petrol comes from brown/black sludge

Needed new pump, assembly and fuel tank, the tank was rooted.

Originally Posted by trublu

Get your facts right, all new diesels do have cats..... dpf is another story & very few Australian diesels have them.

Anything meeting Euro V will have a DPF, its no problem as long as you do a lot of driving/highway miles, if not then it WILL clog up eventually.

Had a Mazda 6 diesel with a DPF light on a few weeks ago, forced a regeneration with the scan tool, it sat there for 50 minutes revving up to 3000 RPM until it was completed.

DPF light still on.

Handball to Mazda, DPF is rooted.

There is a reason why there is a whole aftermarket industry around DPF removal lol.

[Trump]

How much did Mazda want to fix the DPF problem?

[mik]

Originally Posted by trublu

So far from the truth, Federal government legislated the end of lead being added to petrol, same as banning lead from paint for health reasons only, nothing to do with petroleum companies as adding lead is a cheaper option for them in production.

i think you will find it was actually the oil companies that pushed unleaded, pollies may have initially belly ached about the problem with pollution and eventually put in legislation , but the oil companies came up with a outcome that suited them.
this is an old article , some very interesting bits about petrol/unleaded fumes and the different laws between countries, for example usa requires unleaded fumes be sucked out while filling the tank, other countries are somewhat lax.....Australia / britain etc.

also very interesting that the early vintage cars ran on motor spirit which was in fact very very clean , im betting this stuff could be made to run well in modern cars ........ but it costs the oil companies too much coin we will never see it.

http://www.whale.to/b/simons.html#THE_BIG_CON_

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

How much did Mazda want to fix the DPF problem?

Replacement DPF was close to 5 figures from Mazda.

This is why you only buy modern diesel if you do a lot of highway, no short trips or you'll be back at the dealership when warranty is out with a second mortgage.

Or you could just remove it and flash the ECU

Here is a pic of a Mazda 6 DPF that someone on another forum fixed up.









Best way to fix them lol

[Maka]

Originally Posted by mik

i think you will find it was actually the oil companies that pushed unleaded, pollies may have initially belly ached about the problem with pollution and eventually put in legislation , but the oil companies came up with a outcome that suited them.
this is an old article , some very interesting bits about petrol/unleaded fumes and the different laws between countries, for example usa requires unleaded fumes be sucked out while filling the tank, other countries are somewhat lax.....Australia / britain etc.

also very interesting that the early vintage cars ran on motor spirit which was in fact very very clean , im betting this stuff could be made to run well in modern cars ........ but it costs the oil companies too much coin we will never see it.

http://www.whale.to/b/simons.html#THE_BIG_CON_

Thanks for the link mik, very informative especially if you have kids & live near major traffic. Definately food for thought!

cheers, Maka

[mik]

Sort of make a mockery of the cheap diesel doesn't it .

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Replacement DPF was close to 5 figures from Mazda.

This is why you only buy modern diesel if you do a lot of highway, no short trips or you'll be back at the dealership when warranty is out with a second mortgage.

Or you could just remove it and flash the ECU

Here is a pic of a Mazda 6 DPF that someone on another forum fixed up.

http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/...d0255/P1030114

http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/...d0255/P1030115

http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/...d0255/P1030116

http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/...d0255/P1030121

Best way to fix them lol

Best way to pollute the environment and poison anyone next to it!

Repairer and driver should be fined heavily.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by mik

i think you will find it was actually the oil companies that pushed unleaded, pollies may have initially belly ached about the problem with pollution and eventually put in legislation , but the oil companies came up with a outcome that suited them.
this is an old article , some very interesting bits about petrol/unleaded fumes and the different laws between countries, for example usa requires unleaded fumes be sucked out while filling the tank, other countries are somewhat lax.....Australia / britain etc.

also very interesting that the early vintage cars ran on motor spirit which was in fact very very clean , im betting this stuff could be made to run well in modern cars ........ but it costs the oil companies too much coin we will never see it.

http://www.whale.to/b/simons.html#THE_BIG_CON_

Typical old school conspiracy theory.

Lead was a cheap way to protect cheap engine parts.

Lead was also a common factor in spark plug fouling in performance vehicles, requiring regular removal and cleaning.

unleaded fuel forced engine manufacturers to come up with better quality materials, which gave us long life engines components. Spark plugs with Platinum could be used, giving us 100,000km worry free driving. A well tuned ULP vehicle emitted much less pollutants than an equivalent Lead fuelled vehicle, due to the chemical catalyst of the exhaust gases.

No exhaust gas is safe but I'd rather be next to a well tuned car with a catalytic convertor any day of the week, rather than one without.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Best way to pollute the environment and poison anyone next to it!

Repairer and driver should be fined heavily.

My Focus doesn't have a DPF and its meets Euro IV.

DPF and EGR is a ****** bandaid solution to the problem, thats what happens when manufacturers want a quick solution, EGR is rediculous what it does to sensors inside the air intake side and it carbons up everything like a mofo, I'd like to take a look at the inlet side of my Focus if I could be bothered, it would be chock full of crap from EGR, it might work fine for the first 100,000km but afterwards I bet you when sensors are crapped up and the inlet side of the engine is carboning up really badly it will be chucking out more nasties out of the exhaust because of these problems as its not going to be running 100% right.

At least the USA is leading the way with SCR systems which is an additive you add when you fill up the car, which is slowly replacing the need for EGR and it allows a DPF to work more efficiently at lower temperatures, instead of burning holes through it like you can see in that Mazda 6 DPF.

http://www.agcocorp.com/e3/egr_scr.aspx

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

My Focus doesn't have a DPF and its meets Euro IV.

DPF and EGR is a ****** bandaid solution to the problem, thats what happens when manufacturers want a quick solution, EGR is rediculous what it does to sensors inside the air intake side and it carbons up everything like a mofo, I'd like to take a look at the inlet side of my Focus if I could be bothered, it would be chock full of crap from EGR, it might work fine for the first 100,000km but afterwards I bet you when sensors are crapped up and the inlet side of the engine is carboning up really badly it will be chucking out more nasties out of the exhaust because of these problems as its not going to be running 100% right.

At least the USA is leading the way with SCR systems which is an additive you add when you fill up the car, which is slowly replacing the need for EGR and it allows a DPF to work more efficiently at lower temperatures, instead of burning holes through it like you can see in that Mazda 6 DPF.

http://www.agcocorp.com/e3/egr_scr.aspx

If the vehicle comes out of the factory with a DPF, it's because the engine did not meet current emission rules. If the manufacturer designed the vehicle to have DPF it's there to minimise emissions and toxic gases, and then it's like any other serviceable item - Exhaust muffler, Oxygen sensor, DPF.

On the other hand; if the vehicle has been tested and found that the engine meets emission specifications without requiring a DPF one, so be it.

It's not up to an owner to decide wether a DPF should be removed from their vehicle, because another model does not have one.

The DPF is there for a purpose. And the cost of replacement should be factored into the vehicles life time maintenance. It is a serviceable part, just like O2 sensors and Cat Convertors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_particulate_filter

A diesel particulate filter (or DPF) is a device designed to remove diesel particulate matter or soot from the exhaust gas of a diesel engine...Cleaning is also required as part of periodic maintenance, and it must be done carefully to avoid damaging the filter.

[TRAU BLAU]

Originally Posted by Davehoos

Depends on what expert you talk to.

years ago diesel was seen as saving the world from oil use-NOX -and photo chemical smog. so it was then decided that particulate emission was worse.
But is it? or is electric systems need all the help they can.

I don't have a university degree so I cant offer the opinion that particulate emision are an issue for a diesel idling in underground car parks.

Diesels engines also run catalyst convertors. More common in Australia at this time as hydrocarbon and oxides of nitrogen are more of a health worry that dust.

Partical filters or scrubbers have been around for years. Lot of people complain about the smell and the smoke don't understand that its the DPF self cleaning.

4X blowing black smoke--we all know that its not because of worn rings and injectors-like a quiet harley-Its just that the operators don't believe in the opinions offered by those in our employment that cant decide on what is fact or opinion. We all know dozens of people that have had the $5000 threat-does anyone know someone that actually had to pay it?

claimed that fuel in the 1930's was bad.

I haven't got a University degree either but when it's hot weather my body tells me to get to the shopping-centre doors a.s.p.Carcinagenic fumes mainly from monstrous-sized 4WD's are killing people.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by Denny

I haven't got a University degree either but when it's hot weather my body tells me to get to the shopping-centre doors a.s.p.Carcinagenic fumes mainly from monstrous-sized 4WD's are killing people.

Why not say from all vehicles as they all emit poisonous pollution.

[2011G6E]

Lead in fuel wasn't the horrible danger that people were led to believe...when they measured "airborne lead" at roadways, it dropped off sharply as soon as you moved away from the vehicles, because even as a particle lead is "heavy" and "falls" to the road surface. The sides of the road has a higher lead level, but not the actual air itself.

Lead levels in childrens (and the general populace) blood when they banned lead paint and lead solder in tin food cans. It had nothing to do with lead as a petrol additive.

Catalytic converters don't actually start working until they're up to temperature, and until then the exhaust pipe is spewing out far worse toxins than the cars in the "bad old days" ever did. I have never seen them here, but in Europe there used to be dire warnings on unleaded fuel pumps about "Don't wash parts in this fuel, don't let it come into contact with your skin, don't breath the fumes (most places around the world have a rubber bellows fitting on the end of the fuel nozzle to catch the fumes but not here in Oz)", and warnings loud and clear that additives in unleaded like Benzine were a dangerous carcinogen.
We never got those warnings on our pumps, and we never got the fume-catching rubber fitting on the nozzles of pumps. So stand there and breath in all in while you fill up...

The lowering of octane levels was why engine builders of old stuff had such a hard time adjusting...the standard thing to do used to be to shave the head and raise the compression ratio as a cheap and easy way to boost power with other mods, but with a lower octane, you could no longer just whack some off the head and stick it back on...you had to carefully consider the compression ratio and timing to eliminate knock.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Typical old school conspiracy theory.

Lead was a cheap way to protect cheap engine parts.

Lead was also a common factor in spark plug fouling in performance vehicles, requiring regular removal and cleaning.

unleaded fuel forced engine manufacturers to come up with better quality materials, which gave us long life engines components. Spark plugs with Platinum could be used, giving us 100,000km worry free driving. A well tuned ULP vehicle emitted much less pollutants than an equivalent Lead fuelled vehicle, due to the chemical catalyst of the exhaust gases.

No exhaust gas is safe but I'd rather be next to a well tuned car with a catalytic convertor any day of the week, rather than one without.

ease up a bit on the wiki if you have nfi about old school mkay

[GASWAGON]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

ease up a bit on the wiki if you have nfi about old school mkay

Wot is 'mkay' supposed to mean P.B? Your english grammer is horrible sometimes!

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by johnydep

The DPF is there for a purpose. And the cost of replacement should be factored into the vehicles life time maintenance. It is a serviceable part, just like O2 sensors and Cat Convertors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_particulate_filter

The difference is a cat and 02 sensors don't cost close to five figures when it comes time to replace.

Which could just be outside of warranty period if you don't drive your car in a particular way.

If my Focus had a DPF I would have ditched it the moment warranty ran out.

[ford man xf]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Lead in fuel wasn't the horrible danger that people were led to believe...when they measured "airborne lead" at roadways, it dropped off sharply as soon as you moved away from the vehicles, because even as a particle lead is "heavy" and "falls" to the road surface. The sides of the road has a higher lead level, but not the actual air itself.

Lead levels in childrens (and the general populace) blood when they banned lead paint and lead solder in tin food cans. It had nothing to do with lead as a petrol additive.

Catalytic converters don't actually start working until they're up to temperature, and until then the exhaust pipe is spewing out far worse toxins than the cars in the "bad old days" ever did. I have never seen them here, but in Europe there used to be dire warnings on unleaded fuel pumps about "Don't wash parts in this fuel, don't let it come into contact with your skin, don't breath the fumes (most places around the world have a rubber bellows fitting on the end of the fuel nozzle to catch the fumes but not here in Oz)", and warnings loud and clear that additives in unleaded like Benzine were a dangerous carcinogen.
We never got those warnings on our pumps, and we never got the fume-catching rubber fitting on the nozzles of pumps. So stand there and breath in all in while you fill up...

The lowering of octane levels was why engine builders of old stuff had such a hard time adjusting...the standard thing to do used to be to shave the head and raise the compression ratio as a cheap and easy way to boost power with other mods, but with a lower octane, you could no longer just whack some off the head and stick it back on...you had to carefully consider the compression ratio and timing to eliminate knock.

Australia has always been behind in terms of hazardous materials, you only have to look at asbestos, MDF as a carcinogen's etc. it always takes Australia 10+ years after Europe and the US to crack down on.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by EF_6

Wot is 'mkay' supposed to mean P.B? Your english grammer is horrible sometimes!

u leave my granma out of this mkay

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mkay

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

ease up a bit on the wiki if you have nfi about old school mkay

. Ease up sonny, I've been hands on with since I was 13 and backed it up in the books to get the paper work. Tuned them, built them modified them on lead, no lead, methanol, low comp, high comp & chargers. I don't know it all, not even close, but I know a bit.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

The difference is a cat and 02 sensors don't cost close to five figures when it comes time to replace.

Which could just be outside of warranty period if you don't drive your car in a particular way.

If my Focus had a DPF I would have ditched it the moment warranty ran out.

No difference to what a cat was worth during the first 10 years of their introduction. When just about every second car was an XF, about 1 in 5 had the guts knocked out of the cat. Price eventually came down to a decent level, and now most failed cats get replaced with a new one. Same is happening to DPF.

[TRAU BLAU]

Originally Posted by trublu

Why not say from all vehicles as they all emit poisonous pollution.

True.All vehicles emit poisonous gases!The old lead petrol used to leave the spark-plug tips cleanly burnt.But when emission control came in with unleaded fuel the spark-plugs are black(fouled)which look like they're not using all the fuel.

[Davehoos]

Originally Posted by Denny

True.All vehicles emit poisonous gases!The old lead petrol used to leave the spark-plug tips cleanly burnt.But when emission control came in with unleaded fuel the spark-plugs are black(fouled)which look like they're not using all the fuel.

Old leaded engine plugs coated with lead [something] oxide that was a white/grey.spent years explaining to CUSTOMERS that the wet black exhaust is not the same as black exhaust and the different shades of black.

Unleaded engines use soot as a lubricant[valves] and most [not all] use 10%+ more quantity [WAISTED] fuel to reduce toxic emisions--14.7:1 petrol and 15.7:1 for gas to operate a 3 way catalyst convertor is a long was from optimum 12-13 :1 range that modern lean burn engines ran at.

If your plugs are black-its a good chance it has been run hot enough or for long enough.-most of my cars get pink/tan spots from modern synthetic oil or fuel additives.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by Denny

True.All vehicles emit poisonous gases!The old lead petrol used to leave the spark-plug tips cleanly burnt.But when emission control came in with unleaded fuel the spark-plugs are black(fouled)which look like they're not using all the fuel.

In all cars I have had the plugs never looked fouled in any way, brown to black carbon colour deposits but not fouled.

[TRAU BLAU]

Yeah,Davehoos,before emission control,electronic ignition & unleaded the way to tell if a used vehicle was burning-oil(cyl.stuffed)was to put your finger in the exhaust pipe.Is that what you're saying that this is no longer the test for modern vehicles because they don't seem to wear out,which is interesting on it's own because I thought that was one of the advantages of lead,it protected the combustion area as well as sealing.One question:did exhaust systems last longer before emission control, because now there's no lubricant entering the exhaust to prevent rust?

[TRAU BLAU]

Originally Posted by trublu

In all cars I have had the plugs never looked fouled in any way, brown to black carbon colour deposits but not fouled.

Okay,maybe fouled is the wrong word.Just that black hard deposit that Davehoos described which is normal on modern engines.A soot.The spark seems to be contacting lower down on the base of the plug which provides a bigger spark than just between the gap.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Denny

Okay,maybe fouled is the wrong word.Just that black hard deposit that Davehoos described which is normal on modern engines.A soot.The spark seems to be contacting lower down on the base of the plug which provides a bigger spark than just between the gap.

All internal combustion engines produce soot or ash, the colour of the by-product will be different.

Unleaded fuel allowed for the use of Platinum spark plugs, allowing for 100,000km change intervals (Tetraethyllead kills platinum). The only time I've seen excess ash build up on plugs with 100,000 - 150,000 km use is when oil consumption is a problem.

Not sure what you mean by "spark seems to be contacting lower down on the base of the plug which provides a bigger spark than just between the gap".

[2011G6E]

My 1982 Celica fouls the plugs after a few thousand kays, really badly. Been trying to sort it out with different makes of plug for a while, different fuel lead replacement additives, etc. "The 21RC engine just doesn't seem to like unleaded" is the consensus in the end...good thing plugs are cheap.

Still, people laughing at older cars that need all sorts of work to run successfully on unleaded won't be laughing so hard when the government eventually gets around to stupidly mandating ethanol in all unleaded, especially if they've got one of the large list of cars that simply can't use the stuff...

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

My 1982 Celica fouls the plugs after a few thousand kays, really badly. Been trying to sort it out with different makes of plug for a while, different fuel lead replacement additives, etc. "The 21RC engine just doesn't seem to like unleaded" is the consensus in the end...good thing plugs are cheap.

Still, people laughing at older cars that need all sorts of work to run successfully on unleaded won't be laughing so hard when the government eventually gets around to stupidly mandating ethanol in all unleaded, especially if they've got one of the large list of cars that simply can't use the stuff...

In a world where every one is trying to cut down on pollution you think the government is going to worry about old cars, in their eyes it is your problem.