Originally Posted by PandT
... those who detest emission systems in general and this one (EGR is next) in particular such as myself, may wish to consider it for no other reason than that we/you hate to have waste products reintroduced into your/my engine, sweet little kitten/puppy that he/she is. ...
I hate it, too, but if the alternative is to have those "waste products" pumped out into the air we all breathe I'll vote for keeping them inside the engine. Do you have kids, grandkids, nieces, or nephews whose lungs you'd rather have that nasty stuff end up inside of? Where would you say it would do the most harm?
Before cars had smog controls, the SF Bay Area where I grew up frequently had terrible smog created by millions of cars driving around every day. It was not unique in that, but the area's geography made it impossible to ignore. Still, I hated
what early attempts at emission control technology did to cars. (VW did it best with their fuel injection, and Honda with CVCC. All the rest were crap for years.) I thought they were a big mistake. I was wrong.
Being away from the area for a few years and coming back after the effects of emission controls had made a dramatic difference changed my mind. A huge
improvement in air quality was unmistakable. Technology improved steadily, allowing emissions to decline steadily at the same time the negative effects on cars were reduced.
Please, leave it working as designed. I'm no tree hugger and even believe "global warming" is a hoax perpetrated by people who want to be able to tax the very air we breathe in and the gasses we expel, but I do
like to have clean air to breathe. Emission controls do less harm to your engine than defeating them does to people. Besides being illegal, it is just plain inconsiderate.