6.4L Power Stroke Diesel Engine fitted to 2008 - 2010 F250, F350 and F450 pickup trucks and F350 + Cab Chassis

Has anyone completely removed both 6.4L EGR Coolers ??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #31  
Old 12-27-2011, 08:34 PM
BROWN DOG KTM's Avatar
BROWN DOG KTM
BROWN DOG KTM is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Down SOUTH
Posts: 1,562
Received 145 Likes on 93 Posts
Originally Posted by longview1
Got my delete kit on monday, hope to get it done this weekend.
how'd it go lv ...
 
  #32  
Old 12-29-2011, 11:04 AM
parkland's Avatar
parkland
parkland is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,267
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by captain_trucks
I will check next time I am on flat ground. I am not sure where you are from but here in Maine flat ground is relative. We do not have any perfectly flat ground. If we did I am sure 5-7lbs of boost would be sufficient.

Dumping EGR is not the way to reduce boost. The exhaust gases used to run the turbo are in a way free power. They go into the exhaust manifolds and up to the turbo feed and drive the exhaust side fins whicj in turn builds boost on the fresh air side. If you dump any of the feed which is what the egr does you will lose boost but power and mileage suffer as well. The only way to reduce boost for mileage is to reduce the fuel which means take your foot out of it or use less power.

An example of dumping the egr gas could be like a damn that produces power. You have the water source which is the exhaust coming out of the engine. You have the turbine being turned by the water. The more water the faster the turbine spins. If you were to dig a trench around the damn to let some of the water go around the turbine, you would spin the turbine slower but at what cost? The water supply is essentially free. The problem is the consumption of the power from the turbine not how it is being turned.

Your right in saying that the only way to add mileage is by spraying less fuel.

with less back pressure, the engine needs to produce less power, thus less fueling.

Exhuast is not free energy, the engine has to work harder to run a turbocharger than without one. Obviously we need our turbochargers, but my whole point is that maybe we could calibrate them a touch different for better mileage.
 
  #33  
Old 12-29-2011, 11:28 AM
longview1's Avatar
longview1
longview1 is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Grande Prairie, AB
Posts: 1,457
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BROWN DOG KTM
how'd it go lv ...
Check a couple threads down KTM, I posted a link in the thread to it.
 
  #34  
Old 12-30-2011, 07:41 AM
captain_trucks's Avatar
captain_trucks
captain_trucks is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by parkland
Your right in saying that the only way to add mileage is by spraying less fuel.

with less back pressure, the engine needs to produce less power, thus less fueling.

Exhuast is not free energy, the engine has to work harder to run a turbocharger than without one. Obviously we need our turbochargers, but my whole point is that maybe we could calibrate them a touch different for better mileage.

I get what your saying but a turbo takes like .00001 % of the engines horse power to run. Engineers basically say they are 100% efficient.

I believe these engines are capable of much better mileage.

I did check my boost at 60 on perfectly flat ground and it was 5-7 psi closer to the 7 than the 5.
 
  #35  
Old 01-02-2012, 10:30 PM
parkland's Avatar
parkland
parkland is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,267
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
I dont know math too good, but thinking of CFM's * PSI's of back pressure, I'm confident were at the multiple HP parasitic loss under moderate boost.

Obviously we need the trubo to make power though, but my thinking was mostly on "curbing" it's use, not disabling it.
 
  #36  
Old 01-03-2012, 06:02 AM
captain_trucks's Avatar
captain_trucks
captain_trucks is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by parkland
I dont know math too good, but thinking of CFM's * PSI's of back pressure, I'm confident were at the multiple HP parasitic loss under moderate boost.

Obviously we need the trubo to make power though, but my thinking was mostly on "curbing" it's use, not disabling it.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree. You could buy a gas engine.
Happy New Year!
 
  #37  
Old 01-09-2012, 08:50 AM
BROWN DOG KTM's Avatar
BROWN DOG KTM
BROWN DOG KTM is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Down SOUTH
Posts: 1,562
Received 145 Likes on 93 Posts
Flat ground turbo boost pressure

Stock 60mph - 2lbs
Stock 70mph - 4lbs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Both EGR coolers removed & aftermarket intake elbow installed.
After Deleted 60mph - 5lbs
After Deleted 70mph - 9lbs

Note: block off plate installed at passengers side pipe &
Pipe "removed" that fed the coolers.

SO IS MORE BOOST GONNA HURT OR HELP MY MPG's ??



.
.
 
  #38  
Old 01-11-2012, 09:27 PM
longview1's Avatar
longview1
longview1 is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Grande Prairie, AB
Posts: 1,457
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I didnt track it but I thought my boost was slightly lower than with the egr system still intact. I could be wrong though.
 
  #39  
Old 01-12-2012, 06:05 AM
captain_trucks's Avatar
captain_trucks
captain_trucks is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by longview1
I didnt track it but I thought my boost was slightly lower than with the egr system still intact. I could be wrong though.
Boost would be lower with it intact because you are dumping some through the EGR system.
 
  #40  
Old 01-13-2012, 10:40 AM
parkland's Avatar
parkland
parkland is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,267
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
More boost than you need is gonna hurt mileage.


Originally Posted by BROWN DOG KTM
Stock 60mph - 2lbs
Stock 70mph - 4lbs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Both EGR coolers removed & aftermarket intake elbow installed.
After Deleted 60mph - 5lbs
After Deleted 70mph - 9lbs

Note: block off plate installed at passengers side pipe &
Pipe "removed" that fed the coolers.

SO IS MORE BOOST GONNA HURT OR HELP MY MPG's ??



.
.
 
  #41  
Old 01-13-2012, 01:09 PM
SANDDEMON08's Avatar
SANDDEMON08
SANDDEMON08 is offline
Posting Guru

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I have had mine off for some time haven’t seen any real mileage changes, little crisper response and less smoke overall. Boost pressure are much higher towing heavy and need to be watched, i can see 40+psi easy and try to keep it around 37-39psi. I kind of wish I would have done the elite diesel setup with the waste gate but looks like I’m going to do something similar to the wide open performance waste gate that attaches where the low EGR cooler bolts and vents to the atmosphere.
 
  #42  
Old 01-13-2012, 02:19 PM
BROWN DOG KTM's Avatar
BROWN DOG KTM
BROWN DOG KTM is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Down SOUTH
Posts: 1,562
Received 145 Likes on 93 Posts
Originally Posted by parkland
More boost than you need is gonna hurt mileage.
I was afraid of this

I can see 40psi on hills Empty

I just couldn't let my Engine with only 64,000 miles, ingest any more soot.

The Black Crud in the intake was terrible & so unnecessary.
 
  #43  
Old 01-15-2012, 06:54 PM
captain_trucks's Avatar
captain_trucks
captain_trucks is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BROWN DOG KTM
I was afraid of this

I can see 40psi on hills Empty

I just couldn't let my Engine with only 64,000 miles, ingest any more soot.

The Black Crud in the intake was terrible & so unnecessary.

THE HIGHER BOOST YOU ARE SEEING DOES NOT EFFECT MILEAGE! IT IS NOT BEING DUMPED THROUGH THE EGR IS ALL! The engine is better off and more efficient with out the EGR! That simple.
 
  #44  
Old 01-15-2012, 08:35 PM
BROWN DOG KTM's Avatar
BROWN DOG KTM
BROWN DOG KTM is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Down SOUTH
Posts: 1,562
Received 145 Likes on 93 Posts
I agree Cap'n

The Eng is much better off without dumping soot
Down it's throat.

The engine shouldn't receive any more fuel than what your
Right foot is feeding it
 
  #45  
Old 01-16-2012, 05:07 AM
captain_trucks's Avatar
captain_trucks
captain_trucks is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hope you have as good a luck with yours as I have with mine. Don't get me wrong, these are fuel pigs no matter what you do, just much better without all the STUFF. Until it's time to buy a new one I will have to keep feeding it.
 


Quick Reply: Has anyone completely removed both 6.4L EGR Coolers ??



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:13 PM.