AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Quite simply...

23rd June 2005, Page 30
23rd June 2005
Page 30
Page 30, 23rd June 2005 — Quite simply...
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?

SCR is better

MIKE DAVIES' letter ( CM 16 June) asks "Why does anyone go the SCR route to Euro-4?" I am happy to list the major reasons for him.

Compared to Euro-3, there will be a fuel penalty for running EGR and a benefit with SCR.This will give a significant gap in fuel consumption. EGR also has higher levels of oil contamination and shorter service intervals.

In addition, EGR's thermal values are higher and this will have an impact on R&M costs and engine life due to the greater stresses.This could also raise issues with residual values. And. for those who care, there will be environmental benefits with SCR.

Yes, there have been challenging engineering issues to overcome with SCR, but the responsible manufacturer's perspective has led us, and others, to the SCR solution. EGR does make sense with smaller capacity engines, in vans for example, where SCR's fuel advantage has a limited effect and the cost of the extra equipment represents too high a percentage of the vehicle. At the larger capacities appropriate for heavy trucks,it is not an effective solution, And looking to the future. EGR will not get you to Euro-5.

Ian Norwell PR Manager Mercedes-Benz CVs Milton Keynes


comments powered by Disqus