AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Clear alr, but clear

15th January 2004
Page 53
Page 53, 15th January 2004 — Clear alr, but clear
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Operators will do well to consider their options carefully when selecting their Euro-4 purchases, because whichever way you jump there are associated risks.

EGR is perhaps the lowest risk in terms of technology because it's already being used by some truck builders —and while it might result in reduced service intervals it does appear to be working. That's not to suggest SCR will be unreliable, just that it's unproven. EGR will also be the cheaper option.

SCR's advantages include the fuel efficiency improvement which result. But that said, the impressive 7% fuel improvement over EGR technology is, at this stage, just a claim. We won't be able to give definitive figures until all the systems are in active service. According to our calculations, based on 120,000krn a year, the SCR kit's £2,000 premium over a Euro-3 equivalent should give you a capital pay-back in a couple of years.

As ever, the increased legislative burden on the road transport sector brings with it a whole series of headaches for CV users. While the drive for cleaner engine emissions is highly laudable, clean air doesn't make the truck lease payments any easier to find.

With so much unproven technology involved post-2006, our advice will be to either pull your orders forward and take proven Euro-3 technology, or take a rain check and hold fire until the technology is well proved in service.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus