Smart Cdi 54 and steam coming from the exhaust - a heads up

[dervsmart]

My wife left for work one morning in our 35k 2011 Smart CDi and returned 5 minutes later with steam coming from the exhaust, thinking the worst I checked the coolant level and found it needed a pint or so of water.
A visual check of the engine showed nothing unusual apart from some soot on the outside of the EGR and a couple of drops of water running down the block, my initial thought was a blown head gasket.
As we only bought the car in November as a used approved Smart I called the dealer and got them to collect it as it's still under warranty.

The garage had the car for a few days and called me to let me know that the EGR cooler itself had failed, as the EGR cooler uses the engine coolant it was allowing coolant to run directly into the exhaust, creating the steam.

That's it really, I just thought I'd share this in case anyone else has similar trouble - the car is running fine now, although I have noticed an improvement in MPG which doesn't make sense to me, unless the steam cleaned the EGR/Inlet tract a little.

[Evilution]

It's a new common issue that is becoming more widespread. I have a failed one on my bench that I was sent for testing. It doesn't hole pressure at all and very slowly leaks fluid.
The fix looks to be, disconnect the water pipes to the EGR cooler and connect them together to bypass it totally.

[Thrumbleux]

The fix looks to be, disconnect the water pipes to the EGR cooler and connect them together to bypass it totally.

I'd be wary of that as a long term fix.
The EGR system employs a cooler for a reason and disconnection will lead to higher post cooler temps which will either overheat the gas handling components or lead to higher combustion process temps - or both. Either or both will almost certainly cause problems in the longer term.

[dervsmart]

Interesting to see it has happened elsewhere.

[Evilution]

The EGR system employs a cooler for a reason

OK, so the idea is to take hot exhaust gas and put it back into the car but on the way to the car, we'd better cool it down a bit, in exactly the same way that we have never bothered doing before.

Cooling it mid flow is a terrible idea as it increases the build up of soot in an area that is a bit of a bottleneck anyway. It only went in because the temperature of the exhaust gas goes up during regeneration but as regen won't occur until the engine is at 40 degrees and the EGR is only open when the engine is cold, I can't imagine there being a crossover.

Either way, I'd recommend getting the EGR mapped out or tricked so nothing flows through it anyway.

[Thrumbleux]

OK, so the idea is to take hot exhaust gas and put it back into the car but on the way to the car, we'd better cool it down a bit, in exactly the same way that we have never bothered doing before.

The idea is to provide an inert gas (as working fluid) that cannot contribute to NOx output as it already has the oxygen burned out of it. As NOx production is also heavily temp dependent then cooling the recirculated gas helps also in limiting NOx production. There is also I think a thermal efficiency advantage gained by cooling due to the gas (as a working fluid) more readily accepting combustion heat due to the larger differential temperature gradient to the benefit of expansion and hence efficiency.

Cooling it mid flow is a terrible idea as it increases the build up of soot in an area that is a bit of a bottleneck anyway. It only went in because the temperature of the exhaust gas goes up during regeneration but as regen won't occur until the engine is at 40 degrees and the EGR is only open when the engine is cold, I can't imagine there being a crossover.

Either way, I'd recommend getting the EGR mapped out or tricked so nothing flows through it anyway.

Couldn't agree with you more on the vulnerability of the technology used to implement this and waste products are waste products - best gotten rid of as soon as possible!
Operating EGR when the engine is cold must surely be an attempt to second burn unburned hydrocarbons as EGR's main use is for NOx prevention at load - read high pressure, high temp.

[dervsmart]

Diesels and EGR valves are sensitive topics on forums, especially in recent times with the bad press diesels are getting (unfairly IMHO) - having worked on numerous diesels that have literally been strangled by carbon build up in the inlet tracts you can guess which side of the fence I am on.

The EGR on my Smart has had it's duty cycle reduced, but not mapped at completely by a lovely chap in Watford

The EGR system on my Golf TDi (no cooler ever fitted) sits in a box somewhere, having been replaced by an Allard delete kit. The valve on my Mazda pickup has been blanked off both pre and post cooler, just to be sure.

[Thrumbleux]

It seems everyone running a diesel cannot delete the EGR function and bin the DPF fast enough. However, the high NOx and particulate levels being recorded in cities is going to cause government policy change which will inevitably make diesel ownership more expensive. I guess it takes a diesel owner to judge if the increased maintenance required would have cost them more than what will come - otherwise they have well and truly shot their own foot.

[dervsmart]

Have a read of the United Nations report on diesel pollution, you'll see that road vehicles count towards a tiny percentage of global NOx emissions (I think it was 3%) the remainder comes from Shipping & power generation.

The government already have it in for diesels and have had for years which helps explain the disparity in prices at the pumps. It's dead easy to rinse the motorist of a few more quid, so that's what will happen.

Not sure what you meant by 'increased maintenance'

[Ocracoke]

It seems everyone running a diesel cannot delete the EGR function and bin the DPF fast enough.

I thought (in the UK at least), you would fail a MOT for not having a DPF if it came fitted with one.

[Thrumbleux]

Have a read of the United Nations report on diesel pollution, you'll see that road vehicles count towards a tiny percentage of global NOx emissions (I think it was 3%) the remainder comes from Shipping & power generation.

The government already have it in for diesels and have had for years which helps explain the disparity in prices at the pumps. It's dead easy to rinse the motorist of a few more quid, so that's what will happen.

Not sure what you meant by 'increased maintenance'

Are there many power stations in cities? How many big ships pass through your high street? It's at the local level it is being felt and that is from road traffic. It is easy to be blase about it but it has a real impact on the lives of those with respiritory problems and is huge cost to the NHS in treatment.
Diesel is more expensive at the pumps but is a denser fuel so you get no less bang for your buck than with petrol and to say the government has had it in for diesels is absurd. They have created a tax environment (VED based on CO2 and company car BIK) that has made diesel the default choice. Only now is the tide turning.
By 'increased maintenance' I mean maintaining the anti-pollution equipment such that the car does as it did when it left the factory. If that means frequent EGR cleaning then so be it. Cheap motoring at the expense of the NHS or someone else's lungs is not going to be permitted.

[Thrumbleux]

I thought (in the UK at least), you would fail a MOT for not having a DPF if it came fitted with one.

There are all sorts of ruses to get around it. As per cats, gutting the internals leaving the shell, removing and only refitting for MOT, showing documentation that implies the car never had one ( for models where the transition occurred over its production run). ''friendly'' MOT tester, etc, etc....

[dervsmart]

Are there many power stations in cities? How many big ships pass through your high street? It's at the local level it is being felt and that is from road traffic. It is easy to be blase about it but it has a real impact on the lives of those with respiritory problems and is huge cost to the NHS in treatment.
Diesel is more expensive at the pumps but is a denser fuel so you get no less bang for your buck than with petrol and to say the government has had it in for diesels is absurd. They have created a tax environment (VED based on CO2 and company car BIK) that has made diesel the default choice. Only now is the tide turning.
By 'increased maintenance' I mean maintaining the anti-pollution equipment such that the car does as it did when it left the factory. If that means frequent EGR cleaning then so be it. Cheap motoring at the expense of the NHS or someone else's lungs is not going to be permitted.

Patronising with a hint of condescension - good way to make your point.

Yes, diesel has a higher energy content than petrol - if your reasoning for the increased prices at the pumps were true, why is it that elsewhere in Europe diesel is cheaper than petrol, the only reason it is more expensive here is that it can be.....

Interesting point about EGR cleaning, I've never seen a mention of cleaning the EGR system in any vehicles service schedule (happy to be enlightened though) - so you're saying a clogged up diesel engine is fine as long as it emits low amounts of NOx - a clogged intake system seriously reduces engine efficiency.

Anyway, it's all rather a moot point as very few people actually keep their cars for very long, instead going for a new car every few years and with that comes hidden environmental costs such as the extraction/recycling of the raw materials to produce them, with EV and hybrids matters are worse due to the chemistry of the batteries, not to mention the future recycling of said batteries.
My 200k mile Golf and pickup truck are both over 10 years old, they're also maintained properly so run cleanly, Joe public would have got through 3 cars in that time.

[Thrumbleux]

Patronising with a hint of condescension - good way to make your point.

I didn't intent to patronise. Or condescend. Not my problem then.

Yes, diesel has a higher energy content than petrol - if your reasoning for the increased prices at the pumps were true, why is it that elsewhere in Europe diesel is cheaper than petrol, the only reason it is more expensive here is that it can be.....

Ask Europe about that. They have different taxation systems for just about everything. Obviously it suits them to have diesel priced below petrol. Historically in France it was to get rid of the heavy oil fractions other countries used in power stations that France had no other need for when it went nuclear.

Interesting point about EGR cleaning, I've never seen a mention of cleaning the EGR system in any vehicles service schedule (happy to be enlightened though) - so you're saying a clogged up diesel engine is fine as long as it emits low amounts of NOx - a clogged intake system seriously reduces engine efficiency.

If it needs cleaning - clean it. If it's broken - fix it. Alternatively, run a vehicle that doesn't employ stupid technology.

Anyway, it's all rather a moot point as very few people actually keep their cars for very long, instead going for a new car every few years

Not an accurate picture as said cars are bought by others and run for quite a few years.

and with that comes hidden environmental costs such as the extraction/recycling of the raw materials to produce them, with EV and hybrids matters are worse due to the chemistry of the batteries, not to mention the future recycling of said batteries.
My 200k mile Golf and pickup truck are both over 10 years old, they're also maintained properly so run cleanly, Joe public would have got through 3 cars in that time.

On that I can agree. But what is really needed is to look at the very big picture taking in aspects like the damage done by rampant consumerism (as above), the trips people make using a car where they could walk (and make inroads on the obesity epidemic while we are at it), the way people drive (I wouldn't grant a licence to drive a manual car to anyone who cannot demonstrate their ability to change down into first gear with the car still in motion - auto only) as stopping needlessly to engage first gear at roundabouts, junctions, etc and generally being unable to read the road ahead creates huge amounts of unnecessary pollution. None of this will happen of course (though we could do more for ourselves) leaving politicians to do the only thing they can do - use taxation to get as to behave in a way that allows them to meet the targets they have set. It isn't that politicians have it in for us it is that politicians haven't got much of a clue what to do. If they did we would be pursuing harnessing tidal and wave power with the zeal that the JFK administration pursued space travel 50 years ago. Then we wouldn't have to be burning fossil fuels - or need EGR.

[cougar7609]

The DPf was a reaction to the reports that europe produced on the 'damage' of disels. Its poorly thought out and poorly implemented. When really all it needed to be was a filter that was replaced at service time. Rather than really expensive minerals being employed to make the DPFs in the first place, the technology having to be employed to burn off the particles in the regen and then the cost, both monetary and ecological for making new ones to replace the garbage thats already gone wrong.

My advice to anyone with a diesel is if you can work on your vehicles, then buy a straight through pipe for the DPF and a electronic gadget to fool the ECU and once a year put it back on just for the MOT. That way you know the DPF will always pass the test and it wont cost you a fortune to replace! There is always an upside to it as well and thats because you have taken it off and on once a year the bolts wont be so corroded you cant get them undone to replace it or the exhaust when its necessary.

I agree with the above posts, the cost to the environment for recycling / manufacturing new cars is a waste and does the environment far more damage than keeping an old vehicle on the road for 20 years. The problem with gases at a local level is that its caused by the huge number of trucks driving everywhere when really if the infrastructure was implemented correctly there shouldnt be any of that at all because you should be able to send by train and have more train lines, that allow for distribution of resources, goods and wares to be distributed in bulk without sending 20 trucks to do the same thing and Trains are far more efficient than trucks. Then you employ smaller more efficient vans to distribute from the main depots.

France needs diesels, the huge distances between towns and cities means petrol cars wouldnt be able to last as long as the current diesels do. Something the country cant afford to be buying. So where as the average petrol does 100000 miles in a lifetime the diesels you tend to see everywhere have done more than 250000 miles. France also generates huge amounts of biofuel which when added to Diesel males it cheaper. It is also the reason why the french are unlikely to accept europes position on levelling the cost of diesel across europe. There just isnt enough money in peoples pockets to allow them to be able to do that. That would effect business, individuals and those who go to work everyday. It would be unsustainable. In the past we have seen many closures of French roads and that seems likely in the future with the retarded idea of lowering the speed limit to 80km/h and the cost of fuel.

Electric cars are not a environmentally good idea because of the afore mentioned chemical batteries needed, which fail and need replacing, but also where is all of the electricity going to come from? There isnt enough generated to supply every car in each country especially the UK where the government cant decide on how to generate it and hasnt been able for the past 30yrs. The Uk is due brown outs in the next 5-10yrs and adding electric cars to that will make it happen quicker. These problems are the culmination of several decades of fuel companies wanting to make more money and so buying up new fuel ideas and shelving them. If that had not been allowed to happen then we would already be driving hydrogen cars and none of this would have been necessary! The fuel companies are still protesting that they can only get hydrogen from fossil fuels which is absolute garbage! My first chemistry experiment at school way back in 1987 was splitting water (H2O) into its respective gases using electrolysis, very simple to achieve, but we all know that no one will be able to make money out of hydrogen because anyone can generate it! Dangerous as it may be! You know people will give it a go. There would be no stranglehold on the industry that the fuel companies have gotten accustomed to over the past century and it doesnt make them money. Its why we dont see the efficiency of solar panels growing as they should. Once youve got them you dont pay anything to anyone! Especially in more moderate climates where cold winters and bad weather arent the norm. Roofs really should be made from anti reflective glass and panels installed in every attic! But do you see that happening any time soon.... no! Theres too much money to be made from Gas and power station generated electricity. The Uk is screwed because there is only ever gas or electric heating installed since the 1970s and no chimneys with clean air acts being employed everywhere. What happens when there isnt any gas and everyone is freezing to death because the electricity goes off due to brown outs? You know very well what will happen, people will burn things and flout the law, get enough people doing that and the law becomes impossible to uphold. There have been far better and far more ecologically sound options for years most of which no one has ever heard of because the ideas have been shelved for decades. Who will remember all of this when the time comes.... no one but small people with intelligence, instead everyone will be persuaded/forced to use some other money making option that continues the flow of cash to large corporates. It certainly wont be in favour of the environment that I can assure you, of course it will be sold as just that because thats thought of as being Politically Correct and a huge advertising ploy, just like all the garbage they add to cars today.

When you take everything into account with the cost to the environment of attaining the primary resources for the production of cars and some of those are now rare minerals which are increasingly difficult to attain and so is even more detrimental to the environment. The distances those materials travel to be refined and then to travel to where they are manufactured into small parts and then when they travel to where they are assembled into a complete device and then onto the manufacturer of the vehicle, who then assembles them all into badly made vehicles and prematurely ages certain parts, where they then travel to a holding area where they sit for months on end doing nothing but rotting away. They are then transported to all over the world at further cost to the environment to then go in to use by the end user who then only keeps it for 3years before it blows up and ends up in a scrapyard where its supposed to be properly recycled and in 99% of cases it isnt, the plastics arent split from the metals and the metals arent split into their rare minerals. Instead its all crushed together because it costs too much to split everything so its all shipped off to other places where its thrown in a huge furnace and every part melted down and burned off at huge cost to the environment. The only thing left to recycle is the aluminium, steel and copper. Most of which because of the way it was recycled isnt good enough to reuse in a new car because its quality is degraded, its used in yet more substandard devices which fail quicker and hence end up being even more degraded via another recycling process. Yeah all of this is great for the environment!!!! NOT!

So next time you read some glossy brochure for some shiny new car thats being sold for 1000 times more than it cost to make and says its ecologically sound because of all of the so called ecologically good emissions pay absolutely no attention! Its all spin and complete garbage! Only when people start to question all of this will it change and its then you have to ask yourself why arent the parts made properly or designed properly and why cant I buy that tiny little part you need to fix the thing that worked perfectly well before. The world economy has been constructed to make money and has nothing to do with the environment, in fact the environment is the last thing on anyones minds as long as it puts money in everyones pockets, keeps the masses ignorant and happy so they dont question the whole system and cause civil wars. Its very cleverly orchestrated and propagated via mis information and hats off to them they do a great job of it! But enough is enough, we dont need DPF's we dont need CATs, we dont need sensors everywhere and we most certainly dont need spin that goes with all of them. What we need is reliable well made vehicles that can last millions of miles and be modularly upgradable, not heaps of junk sold for maximum price made by the lowest bidder!

The smart was the first car sold as a modular car in its earliest days, whereby you could change the colour and swap panels and add bits and pieces you might want to them, change the look and add features, all after market! Making keeping the car a feasible idea just by changing wheels and colour. Slowly but surely that idea was abandoned and over the past 17yrs the smart has just become just another car, and not only just another car but one of the ugliest cars on the market as well as one of the most inflexible! They should have kept going down the original ideal of the smart and made then engines interchangable, power interchangable, emissions better, modular electrical parts which are interchangable with new technology all so that the base car could remain in use and not add to environmental toxic emissions. Smart should have then continued to make the cars more adaptable and be changeable via chassis modifications all on the drip idea of slow upgrading. Thats what would be ecological and better for the environment. Not DPFs, CATs, euro emissions ratings and other garbage. They should have been a shining light in a festering pile of poo that has become the car industry. The trend setting car that smart was and was invisaged to be from its inception. Whereas now its become just like all the rest and its sold to people as the latest thing that no one wants!