Gas Particle Filter question

Porsche has GPF in Europe for new 992 but not USA, be happy !

 

For the Australian fuel difference that you note I think they will just keep the GPF for the EU and use the other exhaust where GPF is not mandated yet.
One further detail the GPF works well on the Porsche for two reasons. A new type of fuel injection that leads to a more efficient burning of the fuel that creates less soot which does not collect on the crown of the piston or plug up the GPF. As a side benefit the new fuel injection (think of a mushroom spray vs the less controlable turning on a tap) has the added benefit of a higher compression ratio than the previous FI without suffering knock. Second reason the compact engine/exhaust layout which maintains 600C temperatures which burns off what little soot that may tend to plug up the GP filter. The Australian fuel would quickly plug up the GP filter.

 

Someone here is giving false you information. GPF is for Australia too.

 

Just spoke to John Cadogan and he clearly said it would be years before it became Mandatory here in Australia.

Cant see Ferrari delivering cars here with our sulphide content .

 

I think your data is "out of date", here is the update (in summary: GPF is literally impossible for Australia at this time)

Given that Porsche cannot make GPF work in Australia and others simply will not make non-GPF cars for Australia:

https://www.motoring.com.au/twenty-plus-variants-of-the-992-porsche-911-bound-for-oz-117587/

For other car-makers such as Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen, the protocol changes have forced a drastic downsizing of their model line-ups, effectively because Australia’s high sulphur petrol means we are stuck in the old NEDC test cycle process. For many manufacturers, the process of testing cars against both measures – and removing their particulate filters to cope with poor Australian petrol – is considered a logistical nightmare and financially untenable.

However, Porsche sees it differently.

“At the moment, we continue to bring cars to Australia based on Australian regulations,” said Porsche Cars Australia’s head of public relations, Chris Jordan. “We’re homologating using the NEDC numbers and without a gasoline particulate filter.

https://www.caradvice.com.au/732240/vw-t-roc-r-australia-fuel/

Australian regulations allow up to 50 parts per million of sulphur in our unleaded petrol, but in Europe the maximum sulphur content is just 10ppm.

The T-Roc R engine has only been calibrated to meet European fuel requirements. Given the engineering time and cost to recalibrate engines for different markets around the world, the T-Roc R is one of the casualties.


https://practicalmotoring.com.au/car-reviews/2019-porsche-macan-s-review/

Still, at least it’s slightly thriftier than the engine it replaces. While the Macan comes with a gasoline particulate filter (GPF) in Europe, it’s not being fitted to cars sold in Australia for now.

https://www.caradvice.com.au/748124/australias-petrol-standards-and-cheap-fuel-to-remain-unchanged-until-2027/

Great comment from link above:

Petrol to the specifications of most European countries would be BANNED in Australia on environmental grounds. It cannot be sold here.

It's got nothing to do with sulfur levels (other than the refinery hydrogenation process to remove sulfur lowers natural octane levels), its because of the standard European use of MTBE as an octane enhancer.

MTBE is banned in Australia because if it escapes into groundwater systems, it makes the water unpalatable at parts per trillion levels (not toxic but undrinkable). The risk is more in the country where there are old leaky underground tanks rather than in spanking new double-lined tanks in most city facilities.

Future Australia 10ppm S PULP95/98 fuel will be a completely different blend to the 10 ppm S PULP95/98 blends found in the EU and most other developed countries.

Our future fuel will have a different and likely more expensive octane enhancer. Hence Australian blend fuel will be more expensive to refine than Euro spec fuels.

My understanding is that the only thing cheaper than MTBE (& ETBE) is ethanol. However while obviously not banned, ethanol is arguably a greater environmental risk than MTBE. This is because it acts as a carrier for carcinogenic aromatic hydrocarbons in groundwater systems. I would be happy to see E10 fuel banned.

https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-news/australia-becoming-an-automotive-third-world-country-says-jaguar-land-rover-74010

The most recent victim is Range Rover, which has introduced mild-hybrid technology (MHEV) on its petrol-powered Evoque rangeinternationally, but is unable to introduce it here because the technology requires a petrol particulate filter (PPF) that won't accept our poor-quality fuel.

..."These are manufactured with particulate filters designed to run on European quality petrol, which contains less than 10 parts per million of sulphur. Petrol in Australia contains up to 150ppm, the worst quality among OECD nations, rendering engines with petrol particulate filters non-starters for this market. Even premium unleaded can contain up to 50ppm.

and more...

https://www.caradvice.com.au/708809/volkswagen-dealer-emission/

https://www.caradvice.com.au/656615/wltp-whats-all-the-fuss-about/

"We’re becoming outsiders," Bartsch argued, in a long-winded conversation about local fuel standards. "It won’t be long before vehicles are going to have to be produced purely for these really poor sulphur content countries," he said.

https://www.caradvice.com.au/658919/australia-could-become-a-dumping-ground-for-old-engines-vw-australia-boss/


and, this for EU..

https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/vw-daimler-brace-new-wltp-headache

 

Great question, answer is unknown, speculation:

F8 (coupe/spider) will have GPF for all but Australia/other high sulfur content fuel countries (did not review which countries that would include) -- the F8 is already confirmed for arrival in Australia so I can only imagine the F8 is using a 4-way catalytic converter (i.e. includes GPF) and will simply switch it for a 3-way catalyst for Australia, given the proximity of the engine to the catalyst will probably make that fairly easy to do..but, will Ferrari do that for all non-GPF conforming countries?

Portofino? Already in Australia without GPF, very likely to continue that way, as for EU, I'm sure Ferrari is working on adding GPF, it's their most popular model!

812 (coupe/spider) ...this one is tricky, very tricky, the 6.5L V12 would require very large GPF device (2 devices, one for each exhaust path) as the GPF, to be effective, must displace as much volume as the engine...

I have input from several USA dealers, some say no 812 GPF for MY2020 but maybe for MY2021, others say, yes, GPF for MY2020 forward (based on their discussions with their respective factory reps, which I understand are 3 for entire USA dealer network)

Because the GPF will affect exhaust note and add weight (more than 100 pounds including new heat shielding) plus be very difficult to plumb into the existing exhaust path (perhaps Ferrari will use a 4-way catalytic converter) due to its sheer bulk/mass, I could see where Ferrari may not yet have it ready for the 812 and will "introduce" the GPF on the 812 sometime during the 2020 model year -- and EU shipments will stop until GPF fitted, as EU requires -at the moment unless Ferrari receives an implementation delay- Ferrari to fit the GPF (per-se) starting 1/1/2020, per-se because the EU does not 'mandate' GPF, but its regulations will cause pretty much every direct injection IC engine to be fitted to comply with new particulate matter regulations (i.e. nothing to do with CO2)

So, that's my current prediction, either starting by end of this year or sometime by summer 2020 the 812 will include GPF...the big question is, will they do it worldwide other than Australia -- my prediction here is YES they will, it will be too difficult to maintain two separate and very different exhaust systems on a car they build less than 2,000 annually --- so, what of Australia? Current thoughts there is Ferrari will build out several ready to finish chassis+drivetrains and put them in a corner, maybe 100 of these and that will be strictly used for Australia until the end of 812 production and that what remains, if any, would become 'bonus' non-GPF cars for USA or other non-GPF market...

 

Thank you JTSE30 for your continuing research and sharing of information and links on this challenging topic!

 

The story here changes depending upon which dealer you talk to with regard to GPF in Aus and when it will actually arrive.
I note the linked articles are dated 2018 and 2017 and there's been a significant push for a reduction in emissions of late.

Either way - whenever it actually surfaces in Aus - GPF it isn't going to adversely affect the performance of the car so not sure what the fuss is about anyway?

 

So you know how Ferrari started adding these stupid exhaust valves a few years back and we all learned that you can just plug the valves into the “always open” position?

Will this be possible with GPF? I’m thinking that maybe in an effort to counteract the muffling affect of the GPF, Ferrari will develop louder exhaust systems. My thinking is that if we remove the GPF, then we would get the added benefit of the louder exhaust that was developed to offset the muffling of the GPF in the first place? Anyone who actually understands how this stuff works care to comment on my logic?


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

(a) cannot be removed unless ECU is reprogrammed and that will void warranty

(b) adds back pressure to engine because it restricts exhaust velocity, that's poison to an IC engine

(c) adds weight, and the for a large displacement engine, significant weight (50kg or more)

(d) ECU will lean out fuel mixture to increase exhaust gas temperature if your driving is not producing sufficient heat to burn off soot (also poison for an IC engine) [this is a big reason why you cannot simply remove the GPF, the ECU will freak out, it will not sense the back pressure it expects and if it tries to lean out your fuel mixture without the GPF being there it could destroy your engine...]

(e) substantially reduces exhaust note, particularly so with turbos, but also for non-turbo, takes the edge off, sort of like adding a second catalyst but more so [car guys 992 review, JWW Audi review, those are recent youtubes that provide 'sound' experience and their comments]

(f) because Ferrari has never done this before, there could be warranty issues, who knows

I'm sure there's more but that's what I think of first...can't figure any of that is good for an exotic...

and, to put it another way, Ferrari isn't doing this because they have to, they are being forced to...and, one more example, Porsche, if GPF was no big deal, why would Porsche go to all the trouble and added expense of producing non-GPF cars for the USA?

 

Exhaust values are only closed to make the car quiet at low speeds/idle, otherwise the ECU will open them, they were added for sound reduction, the GPF is something very different, this is a nice presentation:

https://www.cataler.co.jp/en/aee2018/gasoline/bere-gpf.php

the link above uses "TWC" in several images, that indicates Three-way catalyst (that's what's being used now in most cars)

 

From what I have been viewing videos on the DPF there are several issue, blockage , warning lights etc. But pertaining to Ferrari owners the cars need to be driven and distances so the Filter cleans itself.

 

I wonder what will happen to all the other cars Ferrari is going to release ????? Stop selling ? Our fuel wont change any time soon > 5 years

 

I don't mean to be dismissive of your points but I will attempt to reply as per below;

a) That could apply to removing or altering a range of parts on the car (i.e warranty void).

What is the problem with not being able to fiddle the ecu or remove the GPF? Less harmful emissions is a very good thing!

I have developed a simple philosophy with cars in the sense that if I buy a car which I find is not fast enough then I go and buy one that is.
I'm done with tuning these types of cars. What they gain at one end is usually given away at the other, needless to add the additional stress placed on other components. The net result is always the same where warranty goes out the window along with the car usually becoming less the sum of it's parts it was prior to being played around with. Hence why i say if you have to go to those extremes just go buy a faster car and make it easy on yourself.

b) This i not right at all and, would only apply where a GPF was being added to an existing pre GPF exhaust - clearly not the case! Also does not affect the IC's - these units on the inlet/induction side, for the purpose of cooling the charged air - nothing to do with exhaust!

The back pressure is governed by more than just a GPF. There is pipe diameter, muffler restriction, cat converter restriction, turbine housing restriction. All of these elements can be altered to accommodate for the GPF - individually balanced out as and where required. For example a 600 cel cat of 80mm Dia could be made 100mm Dia or more to increase flow....or cel rduction. The muffler could also be made so to have less restriction than the pre GPF muffler - again to accommodate. Same with the pipe size/dia. Making a blanket claim that by adding a GPF counter measures can not be made is just not true.

c) Weight can be added or removed in many ways with or without a GPF.

d) Totally lost me here. Suggesting the manufacturer has absolutely no idea of how to tune a correct air/fuel mix...... Like seriously?

e) Again not taking into consideration manufacturers are being required to produce quieter and more efficient, less polluting vehicles.

f) This is truly clutching at straw (re the Ferrari statement). Quite unnecessary dramatizing going on....

I was informed the key issue for Porsche was in designing the exhaust system so it could accommodate the GPF given the limited space.
Prior the sept1 2018 deadline, the current engines had not yet been designed to accommodate for the GPF particularly the GT cars which had a limited production run and were under pressure to deliver. This is no longer the situation.

As previously stated, if performance is not affected, in fact has been now improved from the previous model, then the GPF becomes a non issue for 99% of buyers.

 

Your on the money with B) been there done that. If it doesn't have the power you want by another car.

Im 100% sure that Ferrari has taken all into account .

But the issue I guess is that

QUOTE : Fuel providers believe that it would be impossible to sell unleaded fuel with a sulphur content of 10ppm until at least 2027 in Australia.

that's a long time to come so I wonder how Ferrari will handle Australia. Imagine no new cars ? Highly doubt it though.

The issue to Ferrari owners will be that particulate filters require an extended period of highway driving to allow the exhaust gases to heat up and clean the system. However, with many Ferrari owners only using their cars for short trips, the PPF can become clogged, and is costly to replace.

Not an issue for you Shadowfax

 

All together now "VW Diesel"

 

I have just had confirmation from my dealer that Australian delivered F8's are confirmed to be equipped with GPF . Sad but true.

 

Yep I was told by NSW dealer , no word from VIC. I have already posted it but if they do have the GPF , Ferrari IS GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF CLAIMS.

However they might not care as we are such a small % of the market. But given that its an inherit flaw because of our fuel they have to either agree not to sell the car, force us to wavier any claim when we purchase or they change it when it fails for the lifetime of the car.

Its going to be interesting which avenue they go.