Rawtech tune and and DPF delete

Would you please direct me to posts, no doubt there are many, about converting a Jetta TDI Sportwagen to run B100 successfully with the Rawtek tune and DPF delete?
What are the costs involved to do the whole thing?
What mpg do you get?
What kind of tailpipe emissions on B100?
Thanks.

Are you talking about the vehicles in your signature?

If so, no conversion is necessary, because neither of those has a DPF. The life of the injectors will likely be shortened.

If you are talking about a new common-rail model, the particulate-matter emissions will be much higher with no DPF than with. Even if you buy the speculation that certain biofuels may reduce engine-out PM, it is by a slim amount and in no way compares to the DPF, which gives much more than 90% reduction in PM. Additionally, this will also likely delete the de-NOx catalyst, and it's the same story there. The much higher regulated emissions are why this sort of tampering violates US Federal law.

I've heard exorbitant claims about fuel consumption improvement without the emission hardware in place; with the caveat that a large improvement may occur if you do nothing but short-trip driving and the DPF never gets hot enough to regenerate on its own and you are constantly interrupting active regens, but if you do any decent proportion of higher speed driving, it should need very little help reaching burn-off temperature - thus, very little extra fuel needed - thus, limited potential for improvement, a few percent at most.

It would be very unwise of a company to advertise that it manufactures and sells hardware/software to defeat emission control equipment ... and the EPA has fined a number of companies who have done that.

The only help that I can offer is that if you want to use biofuels, stay with the older-tech vehicles ...

You may wish to read this very recent thread:

http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=423529

No amount of emission-system tampering will prevent the long-term damage to the injectors ...

It's a curious paradox that the pro-Biodiesel adopters are usually greenie types but some of this same group want to delete the DPFs...

Imagine that......

TDIMeister said:

It's a curious paradox that the pro-Biodiesel adopters are usually greenie types but some of this same group want to delete the DPFs...

Click to expand...

My only interest is in trying to run B100 in the new common rail TDIs, if it is possible with modifications and if the resulting emissions are not worse than with D2. From what I've heard, the mpg goes up with the re-flashing of the computer (so that is better); what I wondered about was the emissions of B100 once the car was modified. I have no interest in creating worse emissions.
I have held off on buying the new TDIs (since 2009) because of their inability to run B100. I have run B100 in our 2004 Jetta TDI since it was brand new. So that's 10 years on B100. Still going strong.

Respectfully, that just shows a fundamental lack of understanding of your actions and their consequences. You justify using B100 to reduce (not eliminate) your carbon footprint, but by removing emission control devices (also justified by the few MPG improvement so you're thinking that you're helping save the world), you're actually increasing other emissions (eg soot and NOx), not just fractionally by what you're offsetting from using less fuel, but by a factor of 10, 20 or more. That you're using B100 on an emissions-deleted car does not bring the total emissions anywhere to the level of a car with an unmolested emission control system running on Dino fuel. This is proven from countless studies.

Look I don't actually care what people do to their own property and I'm done wasting time and energy evangelizing on a lost cause that will only addressed if the EPA grows some balls in enforcing its own regulations.

But what I will not sit to let pass is letting other people become convinced because of what they read on an internet forum says that deleting emission controls to gain a few MPG or allow running on rainbow farts for fuel is a scientifically sound justification or righteous trade-off for the environment, neither of which is the case.

The people who want to break the law by deleting emission control systems will not be persuaded of the error of their ways, but some people genuinely want to do the right thing and will respond positively to facts and appeals to logic and I think you're one of the latter group of people.

Amen.......

And here I had been lead to believe that it was unicorn flatulence and magic fairy dust that would replace those nasty petroleum products.

Burning biodiesel will not offset the emissions increase from deleting the DPF. No way, no how.

I've often wondered what the "Overall environmental Impact" difference is between a car getting X mpg with emissions and X+Y mpg without. While this is probably impossible to calculate if you really consider ALLLLLL the aspects I'd still like to know.
Anyone have any study data?
Even more interesting would be if we could actually quantify all the factors such as producing the DPF, DPF failure and replacement, decreased oil change intervals, decreased MPG (emission in removing from the earth, refining, transporting, ect, that extra fuel)
Similar to how Hybrids also think they are saving the world ... This topic has fascinated me for a while, but I wouldn't have a clue on where to find or accumulate real data on this.

It's a hard question, and it also depends on your priorities. If reduced oil use is number one, your conclusion will be different than if air pollution is most important.

But in the long run, I think we're winning all around. Cars are so much cleaner and get such better mileage.

How did I miss that OP lives probably 2 miles from me!

I for one proudly consider myself among the dreaded "Greenie types", no pun intended. My concern for the environment was one reason I opted to buy my highly efficient tdi. I am doubtful anyone can give an accurate computation of total emissions of the CR tdi with DPF vs. without DPF. All i can say is that if I were given the option by VW to choose between decreased fuel efficiency, increased maintenance, and reduced turbo life (ie dpf equipped), and increased fuel efficiency, reduced maintenance, and better turbo longevity(ie non dpf) with small increase in PM, I would opt. for the latter. It sounds like some folks have sour grapes due to lack of testicular fortitude (and cost) involved in removing their dpf's. To each his own.