Behold!

[YZ250]

Well that's going to disappoint a good number of people. .........

In our case the dpf was suffocating the exhaust system so we tried forced regens but to no avail. It triggered the dash light and it was holding back on power. Luckily for us the dpf had a fitting flange on either side of it so we just unbolted it, smashed out the honeycomb inside with a long screwdriver , thoroughly cleaned it inside and put it back on. It had already had a remap and we'd blanked off the egr.
After it was taken for a test drive my lad returned and said "That's cured it, it goes like a scolded cat now".    He never had any issues after that.

[Viral_Jim]

Surely a well maintained non DPF car won't produce any more soot that a dpf equipped one.

It must do surely? If the manufacturers could meet the particulate emission requirements without going to the expense of developing and fitting dpf units to cars they would have done so...

After it was taken for a test drive my lad returned and said "That's cured it, it goes like a scolded cat now".    He never had any issues after that.

I understand many dpf cars perform better without it fitted, but presumably chuck more soot 

[Doctor Gollum]

Soot is the particulate. It's what makes smoke, er smoke.

It stands to reason that a DPF catches soot. But a clean burning diesel won't produce a notable amount of soot.

Put it another way, there's as much chance of a DPF equipped car producing a similar amount, ie negligible, of soot as a well maintained non DPF vehicle.

Unless they're trying to force old cars off the road regardless of what's coming out of the exhaust. A poorly maintained DPF car is more likely to fail the current visible smoke test than a well maintained non DPF one.

[STEMO]

https://www.endsreport.com/article/1810762/updated-mots-include-air-pollution-testing-improvements

[Marks DTM Calib]

It looks like the MOT will be changing to do a particulate measurement to catch cars with gutted DPFs (I suspect 2026 so you have some time)

Not sure how that will work...

Surely a well maintained non DPF car won't produce any more soot that a dpf equipped one.

A well maintained non DPF car will output a hell of a lot more particulates, even the cleanest burning ones still send out soot. (DPF drops the particulates by about 80%)

The same is very much true of NOx and there are those who disable the AdBlue and EGR systems as well (or in the case of VAG, on purpose so they didn't have to fit the emissions systems and saved themselves cash)

It is already checked as part of the TUF in Germany so the measuring tech is widely available

[Kevin Wood]

It looks like the MOT will be changing to do a particulate measurement to catch cars with gutted DPFs (I suspect 2026 so you have some time)

Not sure how that will work...

Surely a well maintained non DPF car won't produce any more soot that a dpf equipped one.

If that were true why would they be fitted in the first place?

[Doctor Gollum]

It looks like the MOT will be changing to do a particulate measurement to catch cars with gutted DPFs (I suspect 2026 so you have some time)

Not sure how that will work...

Surely a well maintained non DPF car won't produce any more soot that a dpf equipped one.

If that were true why would they be fitted in the first place?

That's fair.

Presumably the proposed measurement standard can't be applied retrospectively? What's to say that a Euro 4/5/6 compliant vehicle meets the proposed measurement even though they have been approved to a set standard...

In other words, is this proposed nonsense simply being reported as news to scare people when in fact it only applies to new cars

[Viral_Jim]

I would guess it will apply the emissions standard (which is known by the reg plate)that the car supposedly met when new, with perhaps a margin of error built in.

[STEMO]

It looks like the MOT will be changing to do a particulate measurement to catch cars with gutted DPFs (I suspect 2026 so you have some time)

Not sure how that will work...

Surely a well maintained non DPF car won't produce any more soot that a dpf equipped one.

If that were true why would they be fitted in the first place?

That's fair.

Presumably the proposed measurement standard can't be applied retrospectively? What's to say that a Euro 4/5/6 compliant vehicle meets the proposed measurement even though they have been approved to a set standard...

In other words, is this proposed nonsense simply being reported as news to scare people when in fact it only applies to new cars

They will find a way to get rid of diesels

[Raeturbo]

And petrol cars... then people⛓️⛓️⛓️⛓️

[Doctor Gollum]

Without people, the robots will have nothing to do.

[Sir Tigger KC]

Without people, the robots will have nothing to kill. 

Fixed. 

[Sir Tigger KC]

After it was taken for a test drive my lad returned and said "That's cured it, it goes like a scolded cat now".    He never had any issues after that.

I understand many dpf cars perform better without it fitted, but presumably chuck more soot 

You understand correctly. 

Mine goes like shit off a shovel, especially in Sport and Sport + modes. It's like having 3 different cars in one. 

I do leave a plume of smoke behind me when I boot it and it kicks down a gear though. 

[YZ250]

The same is very much true of NOx and there are those who disable the AdBlue .........

Whilst not condoning it, I can certainly fully understand why people map out Adblue. The Adblue DTC error code doesn't distinguish between a failed Adblue tank pump and the inline heater, so garages replace both. Depending on the vehicle, the cost of replacement, plus labour, can be anything from £1200 to £2000, with the bulk of that being parts costs.
Mapping it out can be done for around £350 and if the person is willing to pay around £50 more, they can add a few ponies as well. They don't have to worry about Adblue fault costs ever again and their car feels more lively. 

[countrywoman]

Getting the EGR mapped out on the Yeti next Tues, it will gain some ponies as well he said, £250.