Silliest MoT failure

"David A Stocks" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

It'd have been a fairly s**te immobiliser if it was... No, the injection pump was electronically controlled.

Yup, used to work on a 94 306TD. All immobilisers prior to being incorporated into the engine management where fairly s**te.

Well it did have a fuel cut off solenoid rather than a cable, but that's almost always (I can't think of any but doubtless someone will remember something odd) been the case for cars.

My dad used to rent out cars and vans, one was a commer diesel, the stop control was a pull out knob that was behind the driver's seat (at the back of the engine cover) It often happened that people rang up to say it would not start, it was just that they had not pushed the knob back down.

This is intriguing.

Having read the article, I think the author is wrong. I believe he is justifying the removal for performance improvement purposes.

PSAs DPF was called a FAP.

A DPF needs to be able to re-generate itself periodically, passively and / or actively. This DHY XUD9TE engine from March / April 1997 has no means to enable a re-generation of a DPF, therefore it would have to rely on passive re-generation. This would not happen on a town bound car. Sooner or later it would block with soot and create lots of emission and vehicle performance problems.

I have contacted Peugeot UK regarding this and will update as and when.

David

It had, but it's reared up it's ugly head again, new government trying to save the motorist money. They (the government) are assuming the general public will keep their cars maintained every year (that's never going to happen), so possibly allowing a longer gap for the MOT test, I've seen some bag's of shit lately that have come up for thier 1st mot !

OK, first I contacted Peugeot UK, could not help.

Next tried Peugeot France, said to try Peugeot UK....

Visited the parts dept. at a Peugeot dealer to "order" one.

For the 1997 306 1.9 TD 5 door manual hatch, it was a catalytic converter.

For other cars / models using that engine, I don't know, nor do I care, I was sure it was a cat on the car I had.

The relevant info I was passing on to the Picasso driver (Staffbull), was that in 2004, one MoT tester said it did not need a cat as it was only the exhaust gas opacity that was measured, and another MoT tester said it had to have one if the car was originally supplied / manufactured with one (a catalytic converter).

David

Thanks - it was last year the "cat" - i was told it was a cat that had failed due to corrosion and would be about =A3280 to renew - phoned a bloke i know who builds custom stainless exhausts and he said he'd put a pipe in its place for the price of a pint - took it back and it passed fine - MOT's due again next month - so is it next JAN theyll be bringing in the new rules or last month, hope its next jan as I can get my planned one more year out of the old bucket :-)

it isn't yet and you could always get another test just before the new rules come in.

good idea :-) can get nearly 2 years out of it then :-)

time for a supermini diesel then - looking for a clio dci 100 - only =A330 tax and 60 Mpg :-)

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Adrian saying something like:

Bosch for vegoil; Lucas+vegoil=trouble.

The Peugeot parts man said the part for the Pug 306 would be about £295 supply only, but as I have found, there are a few aftermarket manufacturers (eg:

able to supply for a lot less.

On the 306, it was relatively easy to do.

best wishes

David

I'd not worry about it - there's no way there will be a retrospective rule change to enforce fitment of cats. for cars which will pass the relevant emissions test without one.

It's all rumour and conjecture at this point - with nothing set in stone.

My reaction to a lot of the proposals was 'that can't be enforced'.

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com (SteveH) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Rather more importantly - the fundamental detail, which seems to be VERY widely missed, is that this will relate to cats on PETROL cars. Not diesels.

The only emissions test on diesels is smoke. Which a cat doesn't affect.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Tony Houghton saying something like:

Generally, CR also uses DI, but not necessarily. You cannot conflate the two.

I know they're two different concepts, but in practice did anyone ever produce an indirect injection CR engine?

Model CI engines don't have injection but a spraybar "carb".

No reason at all they can't be made bigger and use an injector in the inlet instead of the rather crude spraybar. Just don't expect to meet any emission or economy requirements. Also the fuel is not DERV and as it's usually sold by the 0.5L tin I doubt a model shop has a stock big enough to fill a car fuel tank.

The modern full size equivalent is the Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI). These are under development.

They may get eclipsed by bi-turbo SI GDi engines. GDi solves the high load low/mid rpm knock issues that have previously made turbos only of use at high rpm.

I heard that VW were working on a "combined cycle" engine that combined the attributes of diesel and petrol engines. I guess that must have been HCCI too.

HCCI would probably be more popular on cheaper cars because of the expense of a dual turbo system.