Quote:
Originally Posted by ColinW
To Zeb & Raistlin
However, I get very iritated - as much as you do- when factual reports such as posted by Rincewind, are looked at with a completly different perspective to the truth. By which I mean, it was viewed by one or two, as supporting the disconnection of the EGR and it wasn't till I persisted in getting Rincewind to explain this, that it was eventually cleared up. One member did have the guts to admit he got it wrong.
Colin
|
Rincewind is immensely respected by everybody around here. Paying lipservice to his posts is certainly not something that the vast majority of forum members are guilty of.
However, the data you speak of is homologation data required by the DoT for type approval and determining taxation classes of a new vehicle. It is not part of the MOT test for diesels so it does not come into the consideration of somebody wishing to replace the EGR valve with a goal of increased performance/less smoke in mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColinW
Another thing, I offered, what I thought was a concession, to put our thinking caps on, and perhaps come up with some form of halfway house, where the environmentalists, and the bypass brigade, can each have a bit of the cake. Virtualy no response.
|
The point of this thread is whether bypassing the EGR valve will damage our engines. If you want to start a separate one about whether it will damage the environment, you are very welcome to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColinW
So you see, when people criticise, without offering anything in return, and the only goal they seem to have, is power at any cost, is there any wonder I get frustrated.
|
I get frustrated with something every day but as I said above, the discussion is about whether or not fitting an EGR bypass will damage our engines. If any forum member wishes to replace his EGR purely for power gains and couldn't give a damn about the environmental impact, that is his/her business and nobody elses.