Particulate Filter - Page 2 - Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum
- HOME - FORUMS - GARAGE - TECH - ARTICLES - CHAT - CLASSIFIEDS - REVIEWS - VIDEOS - MEMBER MAP - STORE - INSURANCE -
- REGISTER - CALENDAR - INFO - SITE HELP - RULES - STAFF - MEMBERSHIP - ADVERTISE - CONTACT US -


Welcome to the Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum, the fastest growing Dodge Diesel Community on the internet.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us
Go Back   Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum > 07.5 - 09 6.7 Liter Cummins > 07.5 - 09 3rd Gen 6.7 Liter General Discussion
07.5 - 09 3rd Gen 6.7 Liter General Discussion General Chit Chat About the 6.7L 3rd generation Cummins - NO ADVERTISING

CumminsForum.com is the premier Dodge Diesel Truck Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.

Auto Insurance

» Featured Product
Wheel & Tire Center

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-09-2006, 06:21 PM   #13 (permalink)
Banned
 
DORKWEED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: "The Peoples Republic of Illinois".....behind enemy lines
Posts: 2,048
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Can you say "EPA Runamuck"!!!!! This is absolutely ridiculous/inane/stupid!!! With the push toward "fuel economy" you'd think that they'd used their heads a little bit.

Where is the cost/benefit analysis for all this crap??? Where is the economies of scale??? If said pollution control device costs you 5% in fuel economy; don't you have to burn 5% more fuel to go the same distance and would the total pollution/green house gases expelled be the same????

Close to 20 years ago there were gas cars that got 40-50mpg. There are not that many now and I can guarantee a lot of it is from pollution crap required on our vehicles!!! AKA EPA runamuck IMNTBHO!!!
DORKWEED is offline   Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-09-2006, 09:01 PM   #14 (permalink)
Diesel Freak
 
PULN PWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Canada.... 'ISH'
Posts: 711
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Ya, this is all getting to be a bit much!!! Scary actually!!!! Glad i've got a 2004!!! I'm gonna have to make 'er last! Looks like all the fun is gonna stop!!!


Bummed out Chad
PULN PWR is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 06-10-2006, 07:10 AM   #15 (permalink)
Cummins Fan
 
JCStrasser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: northern NH
Posts: 55
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
A couple last thoughts

- I seem to remember that when fuel injection started to replace carburetors (am I really that old?), there were many who had some pretty negative things to say about it. "It'll never work right", "just something else to go wrong", "can't work on it myself". Fortunately these statements were mostly false. Newer technology can have its initial problems, but hopefully it will be a benefit in the long run. Which leads me to a second thought....

-WITHOUT BEING A POLITICAL TREE-HUGGER, we all do need to do our part to reduce emissions. We are one of the worlds largest producers of emissions. Yeah, I was not in favor of all the pollution equipment when it first came out and it certainly has added cost and complexity to our vehicles. But to ignore the health of the only planet we've got is not being responsible. We really need to support this technology.

Now wait a minute while I struggle to get my Nomex flame-resistant suit on before you folks turn up the heat.

OK, I'm all set- let me have it

John
__________________
2006 2500 QC LB CTD/6 speed 4x4

2006 Northstar 850SC truck camper (going, going, maybe almost gone....)
JCStrasser is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 06-10-2006, 10:27 PM   #16 (permalink)
Banned
 
DORKWEED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: "The Peoples Republic of Illinois".....behind enemy lines
Posts: 2,048
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Number 1 green house gas............water vapor!!!! Better cut down the rain forest. I agree to a point, but that point was reached about 20 years ago with all this crap!!
DORKWEED is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 06-10-2006, 10:42 PM   #17 (permalink)
Diesel Freak
 
Longhorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Medicine Hat, Alberta
Posts: 965
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 1 Post
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCStrasser
A couple last thoughts

-WITHOUT BEING A POLITICAL TREE-HUGGER, we all do need to do our part to reduce emissions. We are one of the worlds largest producers of emissions. Yeah, I was not in favor of all the pollution equipment when it first came out and it certainly has added cost and complexity to our vehicles. But to ignore the health of the only planet we've got is not being responsible. We really need to support this technology.

Now wait a minute while I struggle to get my Nomex flame-resistant suit on before you folks turn up the heat.

OK, I'm all set- let me have it

John
I'll go way out on a limb here John, and say that I agree with the eviro comment. I work in the oil and gas industry and daily get to see us wasting our natural resources at an exponential rate-makes me mad, but put food on my table. I want to do more to protect the evironment, yet will be the first to cut off the CAT. I have a real conundrum here, dont like the restrictions (cats, particulate filters) but want to do my part as well.
__________________

2008 MegaCab 3500 Laramie Auto, Not STOCK Anymore.......
Longhorn is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 07-07-2006, 03:04 PM   #18 (permalink)
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Denver CO
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
I don't think it will be a violation of the law to remove the PF but obviously if you have to get emission tests it won't pass. For those of us that don't live in an area where emission testing is required, someone could develop a O2 sensor and temp sensor fooler to make the ECM "think" the PF is working. You can get a PO box in a rural area to get around local smog testing.

How cool would it be to have a new 6.7L that gets 25-30 mpg once the emissons crap is stripped off?
__________________
02 QC SB 5spd, Drag Comp, 4" straight, BHAF, EGT/BOOST/FP gauges, 285 revo's. Walbro 392.
yarddog is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 07-07-2006, 03:07 PM   #19 (permalink)
Diesel Head
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 1,659
Thanks: 9
Thanked 159 Times in 132 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
It will certainly be a violation of the law to remove the particulate filter, under current law. It's a violation to remove any device related to emissions. Now, whether you would ever get caught is an entirely different question, the answer to which mainly depends on where you live. Here in AL, there is no vehicle inspection whatsoever (except for commercial vehicles, of course).
__________________
'98 12v 2wd dually, SB DD, Detroit locker, 64/65/13 htb2, CPP 7x10's, 3kgsk, bhaf, 19*, 50 lbs boost
v8440 is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 07-07-2006, 03:15 PM   #20 (permalink)
Arrowsmith Diesel Performance
 
Wyatt Earp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Nanaimo, BC, Canada
Posts: 48
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Yes, we can all do our part to reduce emissions but burning more fuel isn't the answer! Bare in mind that it is the single occupant GAS SUV that is killing us. If you are basing that on population percentage bring up the conversation of China with OP! Sorry, had to say it.

As far as the '07 not running my only insight into that is from OP himself (or his mule) but I do trust in his insight. That said, it is likely only a matter of time before someon out there builds a EPA approved work around on those sensors. I further believe that it isn't the exhaust system that is causing the problems but more the high RPM and the number of injection events on the new trucks. Maybe I'm wrong (it's happened) but that's my opinion.

I've been running ULSD in western canada now for a while with no concerns except a slight decrease in day to day mileage (5%).

I would also note that the 2007 and up trucks will need to keep this system intack somehow as the DPF system is not cheap to replace - rumours have it pegged at around $5000. Also, that they need to run on the ULSD because by putting more then the odd tank of LSD in there and the DPF will crap out and you will be out of pocket.

Cheers
__________________
Wyatt Earp
2002 Dodge Cummins 2500, SLT, LWB, 4x4, 6spd., QB, FASS, ISSPRO FP, Boost, Pyro, Reese Brake Controller, aFe Stage 2, Fuel Pre-Heater, Hella Lamps all around, sitting on 285 Yoko's.
2003 VW Golf TDI, GLS, 5spd., aFe Stage 1, Upgraded lamps.:thumbsup
Wyatt Earp is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 07-07-2006, 03:41 PM   #21 (permalink)
Diesel Head
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 1,659
Thanks: 9
Thanked 159 Times in 132 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
I agree that the exhaust system is not currently a big impediment to mileage. Driven for mileage, a 4" pipe ought to be more than enough to not stop things up much. Now, whether the particulate filter will be a big restriction remains to be seen...
__________________
'98 12v 2wd dually, SB DD, Detroit locker, 64/65/13 htb2, CPP 7x10's, 3kgsk, bhaf, 19*, 50 lbs boost
v8440 is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 07-07-2006, 03:48 PM   #22 (permalink)
Cummins Fanatic
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 107
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCStrasser
I really want to believe that the company that produces these great engines is clever enough to make these things work. They are a big corporation- would management allow production of something that might fail in large numbers at low mileage? At best, wouldn't that be a pretty big financial gamble and at worst, corporate suicide? I can only imagine that this new particulate system would have been extensively tested before they ask us to have it on our trucks. Don't think that they are just slapping the new equipment on and hoping for the best.
Or maybe I am just being naive/optimistic.

Soon there will be no more '06s and people will be buying and driving '07 diesels. I guess it is only a matter of time before we know if Cummins did their homework.

Just my .02

John


They are not asking us to put it on our trucks.. it is a required emmision component.. It is either put this stuff on or Don't sell a motor...

Yes Big Gamble .. My opinion is they just have to be better than the rest even if it dimishes the life of the engine, MPG and increases maintence.

We as a society have become complacient with cheap throw away items.. I don't think most of society expects anything to last long any more...
__________________
2005 CTD Laramie, Mineral grey, auto, 2" daystar leveling spacers, 315 BFGAT's, air horns, Isspro guages "A" pillar mount (egt,trans temp, boost), Snug top hard cover with Remote latch, bed rug, daily driver with light towing now and then.
Gerry is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 07-09-2006, 09:48 PM   #23 (permalink)
Tech Specialist
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 187
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
The particulate filter is nothing more than a fuel fired cat. It works, but I would not be one of the first buyers if I expected decent fuel economy in short haul driving.
Oregonpharmer is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2006, 08:06 PM   #24 (permalink)
Tech Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Western Massachussetts
Posts: 99
Thanks: 1
Thanked 11 Times in 2 Posts
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
I'll never switch from Dodge, but the "other" brands have the same problems right? This isn't going to be a problem exclusive to Cummins.
__________________
1999 2500 TST Competition, 275 Injectors. Mcloed Twin Disc, 3.54 LS. Silencer ring MIA, Jake since new, boost and pyro on the A pillar.
6 Speed Synchro-Muncher (NV5600) :fist:
DieselDave99 is offline   Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:23 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2