Ping is pre-detonation, where the combustion actually starts to occur on the compression stroke too early via advanced timing, or before the spark even occurs due to high compression low octane.

I've deleted egr in dozens of engines, especially ford trucks, over the years and have never experienced any pinging as a result. Delete the dreaded egr tube and leave everything else in tact and it'll run fine.

 

To further clarify, you can delete all the plumbing hardware but leave the electronics in place and you'll have effectively deleted EGR but the computer won't know you did, so you won't get an error code and/or MIL.

If you get any pinging, just retard the timing a bit, but many of us have not needed to do so. If pinging persists, you probably have some other issue.

 

You have to keep vac lines of egr in tact on order to fool the computer successfully. I think that's what you're trying to say, just left it out?

 

Also know as spark "knock" depending on just how much you can hear. A lot of people are "deaf" to it. In sever cases (& some silently) you can crack pistons. Gasoline is supposed to burn evenly across the head of a piston creating a gradual increase in cylinder pressure.

With ping or knock, the fuel/air mix explodes with such violence that the piston can stall fractionally in time in its motion upward & sometimes you can, while trying to compress that pre-ignitied fireball you blow out head gaskets.

When the EGR is functional, the ECU leans out the fuel/air mix a bit because there is residual fuel in the partially burned exhaust gas that can be burned instead of using more gas.

Stop the EGR functioning however you do it, the mix gets richer, fuel usage goes up, combustion chamber soots up, emissions go up.

And sometimes the ECU gets pissy (different years, different strategies, different results) when it reads the results at the oxygen sensors & can't fix what it wants to see.

 

scndsin: you're buying into and spreading myth! I say that without malice, and having read other posts of yours, with respect also.

EGR does not increase performance or fuel econ in any way, shape, or form. It decreases performance and fuel econ. A decrease in fuel economy with a malfunctioniong egr is a result of the computer going wacky, not the lack of inert gas in the combustion event.

EGR's function is to reduce NOx emissions by way of literally decreasing the potency of a combustion event. There is no unburnt gasses to speak of, exhaust is inert. They could have done the same thing with just about any inert gas, like helium, and they'd achieve the same results. It'd be highly impractical, however, to design and incorporate an additional holding tank for the "Inert gas injection" system when there's an infinite supply of inert gas on board already in the form of exhaust.

The function of the EGR is to inject inert gas into the combustion chamber and supplement oxygen with gasses that wont burn. 5-15% of a cycle's intake event is supplemented with exhaust from the EGR system, depending on load, pedal position, rpm (excluding WOT). that's a 5-15% reduction in absolute efficiency, decreasing mpg and power. egr is a waste of energy.

It's too bad it's not a clean "inert gas injection" system also, because the egr on an engine has the same effects of smoking cigs on a human: one cigarette wont kill you, but years of smoking will leave you with caked intake tracts (lungs) and combustion chambers (heart).

it's easy to assume that the egr's function is to re-burn exhaust for a cleaner tailpipe and to squeeze every last bit of fuel out of the exhaust, but that simply isn't the case. Jamming inert gas into the intake is a way to appease the EPA, not increase, or allow an increase in, performance.

 

Well, I guess I appreciate that there is no malice meant & respect given.

But what I posted if straight from an SAE engineer who helped write pretty much one of the definitive books on Ford EEC systems (with Ford's help & blessings) and particularly the EGR strategies description is almost word for word from his book on the subject.

I agree with exactly what you posted above In-Re ping. Hence the quote.

And the bulk remainder of the this post ^^^ I agree with most of too. Its just a different way of looking at the data. Ford is/was FAMOUS for its million ways of doing things & changing stuff seemingly on the fly without any rhyme or reason during a products lifetime of production. Whether that be for performance, emissions, cost or simply inventory reduction.

And frequently this leads to one Ford doing one thing & another doing the exact opposite.

Sorry if you take that as a slight because its not.

 

Maybe I should pursue a career in engineering literature

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exha..._recirculation

maybe the author of your literature cares to edit this misinformation? That's the first time I've laid eyes on that page. If you google it for yourself you'll find all to be the same.

Post one up that's says differently and we can have a conversation, til then I've stated the facts behind the physics of the egr and you've stated what you may have read/heard from an engineer.

A basic understanding of thermodynamics would allow one to understand how it's impossible for egr to increase efficiency in any way.

Not being an *** either.

 

Well, tell you what. You're right & I'm wrong just so. Inert vs unburned, I surrender. EGR has nothing to do with leaning out a engine & feedback to an ECU won't result in pre-ignition in some but not others or enriching some while leaning out others because everything is the same across the board. And the ECU will get "wonky", but not "pissy".

I give/yield/debase myself.



As far as TD goes I just missed that while studying ME that I never got a degree in. (really, no joke, money ran out & I suck at higher mathematics at a time when calculators were verboten)

Don't know how else to discuss this.

I've yet to find any real opposition to this cats work:

 

The eec has no idea the egr flow isn't there in this vintage efi. It reads afr from o2 and adjusts fuel according to where it wants to be with a given load, pedal, etc. If 25% throttle yields an afr of 15:1 while cruising in od, the AFR readings will be virtually the same with or without egr flow. The difference is, you'll have to be 20% throttle position with egr, and without egr the engine will do the exact same thing but at 18-19% TP.

Egr does enrich the mixture, but not with combustibles. If you took all of the exhaust of, let's say 14:1 afr, and jammed it into the intake, it won't run but it'll read 14:1 coming right back out again. If you take 10% of the exhaust at 14:1 and inject it into the cylinders, it's enriching the mix as read by the o2 in the exhaust. If a sensor existed that read air fuel *before* combustion, the reading would be unaffected by exhaust introduction...so the afr being enriched by the egr is a relative term and one that isn't really accurate, but he's technically not wrong considering there isn't a better way to say it in an easy fashion (like I tried to do above)

I didn't want to offend ya, and hope I didnt. I know a thing or two about this kind of stuff and I have two choices: let it go or give my input..i give my input to spread the word, that is all. I'll leave it at that.

Cheers.

 

soooo.... leaving the egr B.S. and everything attached but not functioning is the best way to delete the EGR, correct? because i like the idea of removing all the hoses, solenoids etc.

 

No, unfortunately you need to keep the egr in tact; solenoid, valve/sensor, vac lines. All you remove is the egr tube and block off where it used to go.

 

You can put a block off plate on the intake. And stick the egr/evp sensor wherever you want, to hide, but the evp needs to remain electrically connected and a vacuum line needs to be connected to the egr, but you can extend the wiring and vac line, put it wherever you want. Tab and tad removal, shouldnt set off the check engine light but you will get a stored code. All the computer wants to see, is variable input from the evp sensor, as vacuum input affects the diaphragm inside the egr valve.

Removing all this junk won't clean up the engine bay all that much, the big *** upper intake, covers or hides 90% of it.

Messing with the emissions junk is a complete waste of time and energy.

 

thanks y'all for the input

 

Sort of digging up a thread here, but it pertains to exactly what I'm looking into.

What type of signal is the ECU looking for? Milliamps? 1-5VDC? Is there a way to fool the ECU into thinking the EGR is hooked up similar to how to delete o2 sensors?

 

It does use voltage to send the feedback to the computer...the only real simulator for the system is to retain the sensor and just block the intake behind the valve. You can remove the tube altogether at this point, blocking it at the exhaust...if you have a visual inspection for emissions they might pop you for not having the tube...leaving the tube in tact or removing it makes no difference as long as you have it blocked between the valve and intake.