EPA does away with DPF

[DKB218NYC]

Emissions requires turned back.

https://youtu.be/LIiQbf9TkPE?si=do8JdjGp9sPPvDHx

[Argosy]

"Several truck and engine OEMs told CCJ anonymously that EPA '27 compliant engines are going to be brought to market for model year 2027 with or without federal mandates."


https://www.ccjdigital.com/regulatio...esel-emissions


We live in a time of political tit for tat. Manufacturers live in reality. They've made huge expenditures for research and design, and are now looking at the tooling and production costs to meet the 2027 regulations. All this isn't going to be flushed because of dueling executive orders, they'd be bankrupt.

[Dave Pelletier]

Yep, I wouldn't get too excited and if you delete, I'd recommend keeping the emissions stuff for when you need to put it back!

Dave

[Beamer2022]

I don't own a diesel, so don't really know about doing the delete. Can you still be fined, arrested, etc. for removing EPA mandated emissions equipment. I know it's probably like doing 57 in a 55 zone, you don't really have to worry about it, but is it still a possibility?

Where I'm at, emission testing is required for vehicle registration so doing a delete isn't really possible here.

[Gary RVRoamer]

It's not as simple as a stroke of the Prez' pen. There are numerous federal & state laws and regulations that need to be either eliminated or rewritten, perhaps requiring a vote by state legislatures. What seems practical is for state governors to announce their state won't enforce the relevant emissions laws/regs while their legislatures sort it all out.

[bentjm]

Originally Posted by Beamer2022

I don't own a diesel, so don't really know about doing the delete. Can you still be fined, arrested, etc. for removing EPA mandated emissions equipment. I know it's probably like doing 57 in a 55 zone, you don't really have to worry about it, but is it still a possibility?

Where I'm at, emission testing is required for vehicle registration so doing a delete isn't really possible here.

You can and will be fined - especially if you show it on TV. Google "Heavy D fine".

[followingsea]

Originally Posted by Gary RVRoamer

It's not as simple as a stroke of the Prez' pen. There are numerous federal & state laws and regulations that need to be either eliminated or rewritten, perhaps requiring a vote by state legislatures. What seems practical is for state governors to announce their state won't enforce the relevant emissions laws/regs while their legislatures sort it all out.

I have not been following closely changes in environmental law since I have retired. Here is some science.

Environmental regulations are based on the threshold of harm. Below a certain level no harm is detected.

For example in the US, mercury from environmental sources produced by man has not been a problem for many years and lead is still above the threshold of harm but has been decreasing since lead has since removed for gasoline according to the CDC.

However, the mercury rule for coal power plants made electricity more expensive with no benefit to society.

The science for PM 2.5 is less clear than lead and mercury.

I have an old ISB and have no DEF. I do not commute to work in my MH where PM 2.5 is a problem.

Two reasons for this. One is that I am retired. The second is there is no place in the US where PM 2.5 is a problem or ever was.

To put it simply, if there was no benefit for expensive pollution; there will be no harm from not putting them on in the future.

[Beamer2022]

Originally Posted by followingsea

I have not been following closely changes in environmental law since I have retired. Here is some science.

Environmental regulations are based on the threshold of harm. Below a certain level no harm is detected.

For example in the US, mercury from environmental sources produced by man has not been a problem for many years and lead is still above the threshold of harm but has been decreasing since lead has since removed for gasoline according to the CDC.

However, the mercury rule for coal power plants made electricity more expensive with no benefit to society.

The science for PM 2.5 is less clear than lead and mercury.

I have an old ISB and have no DEF. I do not commute to work in my MH where PM 2.5 is a problem.

Two reasons for this. One is that I am retired. The second is there is no place in the US where PM 2.5 is a problem or ever was.

To put it simply, if there was no benefit for expensive pollution; there will be no harm from not putting them on in the future.

What is PM 2.5?

[96 Wideglide]

When you see pictures of very large cities around the world, where the majority of the population walk around wearing masks outside, why would you want to go backwards??

[MarvinG]

Originally Posted by 96 Wideglide

When you see pictures of very large cities around the world, where the majority of the population walk around wearing masks outside, why would you want to go backwards??

That is what I’m asking. I know the rules bug us sometimes, but I remember a time when smog was so bad in certain cities one had trouble seeing the beauty surrounding them.

[Brunnie]

Originally Posted by 96 Wideglide

When you see pictures of very large cities around the world, where the majority of the population walk around wearing masks outside, why would you want to go backwards??

Not all of them are wearing masks because of pollution. Many do it to keep from getting sick or possibly infecting others.

[tap4154]

Originally Posted by 96 Wideglide

When you see pictures of very large cities around the world, where the majority of the population walk around wearing masks outside, why would you want to go backwards??

I remember as a little kid (in the late 50s early 60s) driving with my parents along the 10 freeway through Los Angeles, and you couldn't even see the mountains that were just a mile or so away because of the thick brown haze. Even signs on businesses just off the freeway were almost obscured by it. When I lived in Hermosa Beach in '68 I remember walking down to the pier to go surfing, and by the time I got home I had smog throat. Over the decades it has gotten MUCH better, so I also can't see going backwards. Makes no sense. It's like seat belts... no one liked them at first, but eventually they've saved many lives.

[Dieselboy]

Before the widespread adoption of EGR and DPF systems, diesel engine manufacturers were already working on reducing emissions through advancements in fuel injection technology. One key innovation was the development of high-pressure common rail (HPCR) injection systems, which emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The fact is, manufacturers were already solving the problem of emissions without mandated items like EGR and DPF filters.

How it works: HPCR systems use a high-pressure pump to deliver fuel to a common rail, which then distributes it to precision injectors. These injectors operate at pressures ranging from 20,000 to over 30,000 psi (compared to older systems at 5,000-15,000 psi). The fuel is atomized into finer droplets and injected directly into the combustion chamber with precise timing and multiple injection events per cycle.

Cleaner burning: The finer fuel mist and optimized injection timing allow for more complete combustion. Complete combustion means more of the diesel fuel is converted into energy (carbon dioxide and water), leaving less unburned fuel to form particulate matter (PM) or soot, and reducing oxides of nitrogen (NOx) to some extent by optimizing combustion temperatures.

Benefits: This approach improved fuel efficiency, increased power output, and reduced visible black smoke (a common diesel complaint). It tackled emissions at the source—during combustion—rather than relying solely on after-treatment systems. By burning fuel more thoroughly, trucks emitted fewer particulates naturally, without adding complex hardware.

In short, higher-pressure injection made diesel cleaner by maximizing combustion, while EGR and DPF patched the exhaust to hit regulatory targets—solving one problem but sometimes creating others.

i.e. No need to fear an immediate black soot cloud in your neighborhood because of the stroke of a pen.

[bigb56]

Originally Posted by Dieselboy

Before the widespread adoption of EGR and DPF systems, diesel engine manufacturers were already working on reducing emissions through advancements in fuel injection technology. One key innovation was the development of high-pressure common rail (HPCR) injection systems, which emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The fact is, manufacturers were already solving the problem of emissions without mandated items like EGR and DPF filters.

How it works: HPCR systems use a high-pressure pump to deliver fuel to a common rail, which then distributes it to precision injectors. These injectors operate at pressures ranging from 20,000 to over 30,000 psi (compared to older systems at 5,000-15,000 psi). The fuel is atomized into finer droplets and injected directly into the combustion chamber with precise timing and multiple injection events per cycle.

Cleaner burning: The finer fuel mist and optimized injection timing allow for more complete combustion. Complete combustion means more of the diesel fuel is converted into energy (carbon dioxide and water), leaving less unburned fuel to form particulate matter (PM) or soot, and reducing oxides of nitrogen (NOx) to some extent by optimizing combustion temperatures.

Benefits: This approach improved fuel efficiency, increased power output, and reduced visible black smoke (a common diesel complaint). It tackled emissions at the source—during combustion—rather than relying solely on after-treatment systems. By burning fuel more thoroughly, trucks emitted fewer particulates naturally, without adding complex hardware.

In short, higher-pressure injection made diesel cleaner by maximizing combustion, while EGR and DPF patched the exhaust to hit regulatory targets—solving one problem but sometimes creating others.

i.e. No need to fear an immediate black soot cloud in your neighborhood because of the stroke of a pen.

Yep, the difference between my 1983 F250 6.9 and my 2002 F350 7.3 was night and day. The 6.9 was embarrassingly dirty and the 7.3 barely shows a wisp of smoke at WOT.

My 2 newer diesels are both SCR and so far haven't had any problems.