EU4 ASZ Upgrade: Green, No DPF?

Hello,

Given the current absurdity of environmental zones, I particularly admire two engines: the AXR and the BUK (Ibiza Cupra 1.9L 160 hp EU4). Both engines receive the green sticker without a DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter).
The BUK doesn't even need an AGR (Abgasrückführung) throttle valve anymore, and its PDE (pressure drop) values, according to the MSG software, are practically the same as those of the ASZ/ARL/BPX engines.

If I had liked that fully air-conditioned, luxurious Cupra, I would have bought another one.

Instead, I'm now thinking about eventually converting my ASZ engine to a BUK and also getting the green sticker without a DPF.
The differences in parts related to emissions around the engine are limited to the turbocharger, intercooler, EGR valve, cooled EGR system, PDE (pre-injection device), catalytic converter, and, of course, the software.
If you were to swap out these small parts, I would technically have the BUK transmission in my Polo, with its ingenious long gearing.

I suspect that in the end, there would be an expensive individual inspection, including an emissions test. However, getting rid of my (practically unsellable due to its features) Polo and buying another similarly young EU4 TDI with similar fuel consumption and driving pleasure would also be very expensive in the long run.
When I look at the emission data for the ASZ Polo / BUK, there aren't necessarily huge differences between them, but the BUK only just meets the EU4 standards for NOx and particulate matter.

EU4 max. CO / NOx / HC+Nox / Particulate Matter
g/km 0.5 / 0.25 / 0.3 / 0.025
ASZ (EU3) 0.131 / 0.464 / 0.486 / 0.019
BPX (EU3) 0.158 / 0.256 / 0.276 / 0.026
BLT (EU4) 0.172 / 0.191 / 0.220 / 0.018
BUK (EU4) 0.156 / 0.241 / 0.256 / 0.023

Nevertheless, it would intrigue me - if there are no other legal obstacles.
What do the experts here think my chances of success are?
Or are there any concrete regulations that might make it impossible for me to upgrade my vehicle's emissions class? For example, is there some kind of "key number" mystery involved?
Could it be possible to obtain a type approval certificate instead of an individual one, which could then be used as a basis for retrofitting other Polo models without requiring their own emissions testing?

As a layman, I would say that this is going to be very expensive, because the emissions test report is not linked to the engine code, but to the specific engine in a particular vehicle.
Therefore, you will need a performance test and an emissions test report.

If you weren't already aware, here's some information that might be useful.
Regarding stickers and related items...

http://www.a2-freun.de/forum/showthread.php?t=28924

ulf wrote:

... Nevertheless, it would intrigue me - if there are no other legal obstacles.

They exist (unfortunately).

Quote:

What do the experts here think my chances of success are?

Fair to poor, but definitely not impossible.

Quote:

Or are there any concrete regulations that would make it impossible for me to upgrade to a higher emissions class in my case?

Impossible, but very expensive and complicated.

Quote:

For example, this mystery surrounding the key numbers?

So, that's not your biggest problem. You want to create a lasting combination by upgrading to EU4. There's definitely potential there.

Quote:

Could it be possible to obtain, instead of an individual expert opinion, a type approval certificate(?) that could be used as a basis for retrofitting other Polo models without requiring their own emissions tests?

"Sample expert opinion" is the key term. However, you need the equivalent value of two to three "Poldis" to create it.
If you can find enough co-investors, it could be something. However, I assume that retrofitting a DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) will still be cheaper.
Individual inspection for your vehicle? Hmm... that might be possible, but turning that into a standard inspection report is a different matter.
Unfortunately, I can't tell you off the top of my head what additional tests would be necessary, but one vehicle certainly isn't enough. I even doubt that the testing organization would be willing to compromise. Especially after the DPF debacle with the (almost) ineffective retrofit filters.

Do it ...

vgatuning wrote:

If you are not already aware, here is some useful information about stickers and related topics.

D4 is sufficient for the green sticker.
My AXR also has EU3/D4 listed. This is also only because the OBD2 capability is not implemented. Later AXR engines have this feature, and those are registered as having "real" EU4 compliance.

ulf wrote:

EU4 max. CO / NOx / HC+Nox / Particulate Matter g/km 0.5 / 0.25 / 0.3 / 0.025 ASZ (EU3) 0.131 / 0.464 / 0.486 / 0.019

If you look at it more closely, the ASZ (Abgas-Selbstdiagnose-System) only deviates in the NOx value (and the sum of the NOx and HC values then changes accordingly). However, halving that value to meet the EU4 standard will not be easy.
It would be worth trying to equip the ASZ engine with PD1.1 injectors (from the AXR engine) and a controlled, water-cooled EGR system with a diesel particulate filter. The software in the engine control unit (ECU) would need to be adjusted to match the changes in function, and then tested. The question is whether the engine would then reliably produce the 96 kW (approximately 129 horsepower).

Bertil wrote:

When you look at it more closely, the ASZ only deviates in the NOx value (the sum of the NOx and HC values then changes accordingly). But halving the value to meet the EU4 standard will not be easy...

It would be worth trying to equip the ASZ with the PD1.1 (from the AXR) and the controlled, water-cooled EGR system with a catalytic converter. } Of course, I wouldn't try that without any prior knowledge.
But the BUK already demonstrates it - even with 160 horsepower, a large particulate filter, and without an EGR valve.

Could someone possibly check what the differences are in this PDE?

ASZ, BPX = 038130073AL (EU3)
BLT = 038130073BA (130 hp, EU4 standard)
BUK = 038130073BJ (160 hp, EU4 standard)



Of course, the exhaust emissions are also likely to be significantly influenced by the inertia of the test bench. And in the KBA (German Federal Motor Transport Authority) list, a uniform value of 1360 kg is specified for all of the aforementioned engines.
Mein Polo ist aber "relativ leichter" (Leergewicht lt. Zulassung = 1230 kg incl. Driver.
Is there a possibility of running the exhaust cycle with a flywheel mass lower than 1360 kg? How is the flywheel mass determined for the cycle, and in what increments can/must it be adjusted?

ulf wrote:

.... Could someone possibly check what the differences are in this PDE?

Sure... here you go:

ASZ, BPX = 038130073AL (EU3) -> PDE-P1.3/80/550S39 -> 0 414 720 039
BLT = 038130073BA (130 hp EU4) -> PDE-P1.1/80/520S216 -> 0 414 720 216
BUK = 038130073BJ (160 hp EU4) -> PDE-P1.1/80/550S229 -> 0 414 720 229

Here's the solution. The EU4 vehicles have PD 1.1, just like the AXR.

Okay, I've learned something again .

Quote:

Of course, the exhaust emissions are also likely to be significantly influenced by the inertia of the test bench. And in the KBA (German Federal Motor Transport Authority) list, a uniform value of 1360 kg is specified for all of the aforementioned engines. Mein Polo ist aber "relativ leichter" (Leergewicht lt. Zulassung = 1230 kg incl. Driver. Could there be a chance to run the exhaust cycle with a rotational inertia lower than 1360 kg? How is the rotational inertia determined for the cycle, and in what increments can/must it be adjusted?

The rotational inertia is determined during the inspection. However, in a single inspection, the approval value specified in the operating permit (ABE) is usually used (which is what is listed in your document anyway).
The final results of the emissions test are calculated from the measured values and various "correction factors" (including, for example, the moment of inertia).
According to that, you might have better chances with Poldi .



P.S.: I just noticed that the part number 038130073BJ is for the BPW 2L TDI with 103kw (140PS). I can't find the BUK in the parts list right now...

Bertil wrote:

ASZ, BPX = 038130073AL (EU3) -> PDE-P1.3/80/550S39 -> 0 414 720 039 BLT = 038130073BA (130 hp EU4) -> PDE-P1.1/80/520S216 -> 0 414 720 216 BUK = 038130073BJ (160 hp EU4) -> PDE-P1.1/80/550S229 -> 0 414 720 229 Here is the solution. The EU4 vehicles have PD 1.1, just like the AXR.

...where the BJ (presumably referring to a specific part or component) are even 550s, which makes them ideal "large, clean" tuning parts.

What's surprising to me is that P1.3 (ASZ / BPX) sounds like a later revision than P1.1 (AXR / BUK). Did the (likely) optimization initially come at the expense of emissions values, or how can this apparent contradiction be explained?

Quote:

The flywheel mass is determined during the test. In a single inspection, however, the approval value specified in the ABE (General Approval for Motor Vehicles) is used normally (which is what is listed anyway).

Hmm... is there a chance of getting an "unnormally" low flywheel mass due to Poldi's minimal equipment?

Quote:

P.S.: I just noticed that the 038130073BJ is for the BPW 2L TDI with 103kw (140PS). I can't find the BUK in the parts list right now...

As far as I know, it's only available from Seat.

Ulf,

What about the pistons in the different engines?
I can imagine that the PD1.1 elements are also shaped differently due to the changed injection geometry.
If that is the case, then your plan would become extremely complex.

ulf wrote:

...which means the BJ models even have 550 engines, making them ideal "large, clean" tuning platforms.

Yes, definitely.

Quote:

What's surprising to me is that P1.3 (ASZ / BPX) sounds like a later revision than P1.1 (AXR / BUK). Did the (likely) optimization initially come at the expense of emissions values, or how can this apparent contradiction be explained?

You're right, the contradiction is only apparent. The 1.3 versions are actually "older" versions that have been optimized from the 1.0 versions.
As far as I can tell, it probably uses the modified (less power-intensive) mechanics from the PD1.1, but still with the "old" nozzle geometry of the 1.0.

Quote:

Hm... Is there a chance of achieving an "abnormally" low moment of inertia due to the minimal equipment of the Poldi?

Most of the time, these values are determined using test carriers that are almost empty. Production vehicles easily exceed these values. Yours probably comes close to a test carrier, but is slightly below? Well... Then not by much.

Quote:

As far as I know, that is only available

from Seat.
Okay, I understand. Nevertheless, it should appear in the list, regardless of which OEM manufacturer uses it.

Bertil wrote:

The 1.3 versions are actually "older" optimized versions of the 1.0 versions. As far as I can tell, it probably uses the modified (less power-intensive) mechanics from the PD1.1, but still with the "old" nozzles from the 1.0.

And the 1.1 versions also have a better atomization geometry for EU4?
Hopefully, this doesn't come with a stronger tendency to cause coking (in the direction of the 170 HP PPDE). Otherwise, I'd really regret starting this project...

Quote:

These values are usually determined with test vehicles that are almost empty. Production vehicles easily exceed those values. Yours probably comes close to a test vehicle, but is below? Well... Then not by much.

Even a small amount would mean more favorable conditions.
The 1360 kg weight for the Polo can be almost exactly explained by the maximum catalog weight (1344 kg) . . . if you then choose the next higher adjustable weight in 20 kg increments, you would arrive at 1360 kg.
If the Poldi were explicitly weighed, I would estimate its moment of inertia to be approximately 1200 kg.

ulf wrote:

Bertil wrote: The 1.3 versions are actually "older" optimized versions of the 1.0 versions. As far as I can tell, it probably uses the modified (less power-intensive) mechanics from the PD1.1, but still with the "old" nozzles from the 1.0. And the 1.1 versions also have a better atomization geometry for EU4?

Yes, I corrected it above afterwards.

Quote:

Hopefully, this doesn't come with a stronger tendency to cause coking (in the direction of the 170 HP PPDE). Otherwise, I'd really regret starting this project...

No, these are not PPDs from the company whose name I no longer want to pronounce .
These are Boch nozzles.

Quote:

Quote: These values are usually determined using test setups that are almost empty. Production vehicles easily exceed those values. Yours probably comes close to a test setup, but is slightly below? Well... Then not by much. Even a small amount would mean more favorable conditions.

So, for your Plodi, I have 1150kg with the lightest equipment. That means you are still exactly 80kg "overweight" .
However, this value was later increased to 1250 kg for reasons unknown. I no longer have any information regarding the weight capacity for this particular vehicle.
Of course, with a weight of 1360 kg, you have a significant advantage.

ulf wrote:

... The 1360 kg weight for the Polo can be almost exactly explained by the maximum catalog weight (1344 kg) . . . if you then choose the next higher adjustable weight in 20 kg increments, you would arrive at 1360 kg.

My Golf Estate is specified with a curb weight of 1360kg.
Laut Fz. Weight: 1395 kg.
Actually, it is 1550 kg .
Regarding the exhaust emission values, it suddenly becomes 1590kg .
With that, my overfeeding luxury bomber is 40kg lighter than the test vehicle .

Quote:

If the Poldi were explicitly weighed, I would then calculate approximately 1200 kg of rotating mass.

1150 kg or (at most) 1250 kg. That should fit in your car.

Bertil wrote:

What about the pistons in the different engines? I can imagine that the PD1.1 elements are also shaped differently due to the changed injection geometry. If that is the case, then your plan would become extremely complex.

According to the documents, ASZ, BLT, BPX, and BUK engines have the same part numbers for pistons, cylinder heads, valves, and intake manifolds. Therefore, the combustion chamber geometry should be identical.

Quote:

So, for your Plodi, I have 1150kg with the lightest equipment. That means you are still exactly 80kg "overweight"

. According to the catalog, I have 1155kg without a driver, which results in 1230kg with (a 75kg standard) driver. That's also what's stated in my vehicle registration, with "up to 1394 depending on equipment," so a maximum of 1319kg without a driver.

The maximum weight of 1344 kg applies to the facelift model, which includes the comfort package with central locking, electric windows, and electric mirrors.

My estimated real weight of 1200 kg is based on several weighings. Presumably, the seat lifting mechanisms are quite heavy .

Quote:

My Golf Estate is specified with a curb weight of 1360kg. Laut Fz. Weight: 1395 kg. Actually, it weighs 1550 kg. Regarding the emission values, it suddenly becomes 1590kg

. And what "depending on the equipment" value do you have listed on the registration document?

ulf wrote:

... The maximum weight of 1344 kg applies to the facelift model, which includes the comfort package with central locking, electric windows, and electric mirrors. ...

Ah, yes. That could also explain the later increase in the standard flywheel weight from 1150 to 1250.



Oh, one more thing...

You will need to provide documentation specifying which parts are original and which have been modified. This means creating a bill of materials. The complete documentation will likely be quite extensive.

Bertil wrote:

ulf wrote: ... The maximum weight of 1344 kg applies to the facelift model, which includes the comfort package with central locking, electric windows, and electric mirrors. ... Ah, yes. This could also explain the later increase in the standard flywheel mass from 1150 to 1250.

Wow: +100 kg of flywheel mass due to 15 kg more base weight?
Are the 1360 kg of flywheel mass listed in the KBA (German Federal Motor Vehicle Office) specifications (for ASZ / BLT / BPX / BUK) also included in the standard configurations, or how are they determined?
Is there a standard table for moment of inertia values for passenger cars that allows you to estimate the cycle moment of inertia based on the actual weight?

Quote:

You will need to provide proof of which parts are original and which have been modified. Therefore, you need to create a bill of materials. The complete documentation will not be easy.

That should (for me) be a smaller problem.