BoilermakerSteve
Observer
The DEF is probably 32.5% actual Nitrogen, not 32.5% urea. At least that is how it is rated in fertilizer form. Urea is a fairly complex molecule that includes Nitrogen, but isn't exclusively Nitrogen.
What about the DEF system when you travel to Third World countries?
- Thread starter John E Davies
- Start date
The DEF is probably 32.5% actual Nitrogen, not 32.5% urea. At least that is how it is rated in fertilizer form. Urea is a fairly complex molecule that includes Nitrogen, but isn't exclusively Nitrogen.
Bill Beers
Explorer
I'm just going off the wiki page on AdBlue, so it may be wrong.
it does freeze/ get too cold to work. Our new truck has a 5 or so gallon tank and lasts about 3 days at 1000 rpm. we work in the oil feild and can spend many days on a rig sometimes running our hydraulics and generator at a set RPM. sometimes our trucks sit work for months stright with just a few mile trip every week or so to move to another well site. I have been up to north dakota and herd many complaining about runing in limp mode for long periords because of frozen fluid in their pickup trucks. Most places do not see 20 or 30 below on a consistant basis like we do though.
dzzz
™
Seems like some heating tape on the supply tube would fix the freezing problem. Or perhaps a espar/webasto heater would work by keeping the engine water temp up. If the engine doesn't reach full operating temp it can't be happy.
As far as getting adblue, just have a case shipped. Maybe a family member could ship mail with it.
But I agree the problem for world travel isn't the adblue, but ULSD. The solution to ULSD may eliminate adblue. There are still states that don't do emissions testing, so there are companies that produce "off road" kits.
If all this is too much buy a vehicle 2006 or older. "Offroad conversion" or used are the two choices.
As far as getting adblue, just have a case shipped. Maybe a family member could ship mail with it.
But I agree the problem for world travel isn't the adblue, but ULSD. The solution to ULSD may eliminate adblue. There are still states that don't do emissions testing, so there are companies that produce "off road" kits.
If all this is too much buy a vehicle 2006 or older. "Offroad conversion" or used are the two choices.
X2 to cwsqbm's comment on the absence of ultra-low sulfur diesel south of the border.
Running a newer (2007-present) diesel engine on high sulfur fuel is definitely a bad idea. While the engine will run on the old style diesel, the emissions control systems will be damaged. The diesel particulate trap, in particular, is likely to get gummed up to the point where it will increase back pressure in the exhaust, making the engine run poorly. Replacing the DPF is expensive. In addition, running your vehicle on the old diesel fuel will void the manufacturer's warranty.
If you know that your travels will take your vehicle to Mexico and points south for an extended period, I'd look for a vehicle with a 2006 or older diesel engine. Or consider buying a new vehicle in a country where ULSD is not yet required.
Running a newer (2007-present) diesel engine on high sulfur fuel is definitely a bad idea. While the engine will run on the old style diesel, the emissions control systems will be damaged. The diesel particulate trap, in particular, is likely to get gummed up to the point where it will increase back pressure in the exhaust, making the engine run poorly. Replacing the DPF is expensive. In addition, running your vehicle on the old diesel fuel will void the manufacturer's warranty.
If you know that your travels will take your vehicle to Mexico and points south for an extended period, I'd look for a vehicle with a 2006 or older diesel engine. Or consider buying a new vehicle in a country where ULSD is not yet required.
GR8ADV
Explorer
I know timing is everything, but unless one has the financial stability to flip this vehicle after a couple years, isn't this kind of like going back to the 70's and buying a car that would run on leaded gas. But if the old ones run fine on ULSD then no worries I guess. I was just not sure how they would fare.
Seems to me like the ROW will catch up sooner rather than later on this front as most of the developing countries buy their fuel from more developed countries. It is not like they have to wait until they have the money or technology to produce it themselves. And I wonder how long the big refineries will continue to produce 2 products with the ULSD becomming the standard.
Just my 2 pennies.
Last edited:
It's true that several countries in South America have low sulfur diesel projects under way. The problem is that (1) most of these projects are still on the drawing board, or just starting production, and (2) the output of the plants is small compared to the total volume of diesel consumed.
Since emissions control is the primary use of low sulfur diesel, it makes sense for countries to first sell it in urban areas, where air pollution is an issue. So I expect that for the next 10 years at least, the diesel you'll buy in more remote areas of South America will be standard #2 diesel, not ULSD.
Since emissions control is the primary use of low sulfur diesel, it makes sense for countries to first sell it in urban areas, where air pollution is an issue. So I expect that for the next 10 years at least, the diesel you'll buy in more remote areas of South America will be standard #2 diesel, not ULSD.
dhackney
Expedition Leader
Here's a thread on ULSD, global fuel, emission standards by market and which model year vehicles are affected: http://expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25516
Antichrist
Expedition Leader
I've actually started poking around on the internet looking for a DEF system that can be retrofitted to an older diesel.
I know very little about it so far so don't even know if it's possible. Since it's sprayed in to the exhaust it seems like it would reduce emissions without reducing mpg or any other negative effects on the engine.
I know very little about it so far so don't even know if it's possible. Since it's sprayed in to the exhaust it seems like it would reduce emissions without reducing mpg or any other negative effects on the engine.
charlieaarons
Explorer
That's a very "do-good" act of yours. I doubt
anything will come of it since SCR systems
are controlled by microprocessors and sensors.
Does this have anything to do with the difficulties
of getting ULSD and urea solution in 3rd
world countries? Do you even own a computer
controlled diesel?
BTW too much urea releases ammonia in the
exhaust, which is considered a serious pollutant.
Why would you even think of doing this!
Charlie
anything will come of it since SCR systems
are controlled by microprocessors and sensors.
Does this have anything to do with the difficulties
of getting ULSD and urea solution in 3rd
world countries? Do you even own a computer
controlled diesel?
BTW too much urea releases ammonia in the
exhaust, which is considered a serious pollutant.
Why would you even think of doing this!
Charlie
Last edited:
charlieaarons
Explorer
Where does that "fact" come from?
The truth is the other way around. The US imports
huge amounts of refined products.
Charlie
Antichrist
Expedition Leader
No, not computer controlled and I have no desire to have one.
Like I said, I've just started looking in to DEF so I'm a complete noob to it.
Obviously a fair bit to learn.
true. but... i believe what gr8ad is saying is that a country with little development is likly not to have much oil refining capacity compared to a more developed country like Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Canada, etc..... The us does import a lot of its crude, but mostly from Canada, Venezuela, and other countries in North and South America as compared to the middle east. ex... in january we got nearly 5 million bbl/day from canada,(first) venezuela (fourth)and mexico (second) vs. 1 million bbl/day from Saudi Arabia (third). We import around 51% of our total consumption of crude.
from what i know we import around 3 million bbl/day of refined products from various countries. 20% from Canada and 15% form the carribian islands. It looks like Canada supplies nearly 50% of our ulsd.
from what i know we import around 3 million bbl/day of refined products from various countries. 20% from Canada and 15% form the carribian islands. It looks like Canada supplies nearly 50% of our ulsd.
rblackwell
Adventurer
Diesel in central and south america
There are already DEF/DPF delete kits available in the aftermarket for the latest Fords/GM/Dodge.
My research suggests that GXV has good info about DEF/DPF deletes for 3rd world travel.
During 2090-2010 my wife and I drove 36,000 miles in Central and South America in a 2008 Chevy Duramax. We never once saw ULSD fuel. A few times in Argentina and Panama we could have got "Euro Diesel 5". We modified our Chevy with a DPF delete kit and performance programmer modified. It ran perfectly.
There are already DEF/DPF delete kits available in the aftermarket for the latest Fords/GM/Dodge.
My research suggests that GXV has good info about DEF/DPF deletes for 3rd world travel.
During 2090-2010 my wife and I drove 36,000 miles in Central and South America in a 2008 Chevy Duramax. We never once saw ULSD fuel. A few times in Argentina and Panama we could have got "Euro Diesel 5". We modified our Chevy with a DPF delete kit and performance programmer modified. It ran perfectly.
charlieaarons
Explorer
Did you remove the EGR system as well? Did you advance your timing a bit with the DEF delete computer mods? Did mpg increase?
I removed the EGR cooler on my U500 and though mpg did not improve I am happy to have that piece of unreliable lube oil pollution sitting in my garage.
Charlie
I removed the EGR cooler on my U500 and though mpg did not improve I am happy to have that piece of unreliable lube oil pollution sitting in my garage.
Charlie