Again some more interesting comments. I can understand the need for a DPF in view of the increasing amount of diesels now being sold compared to say 10 yrs ago. The soot emitted causes many thousands of deaths per year through cancer or lung diseases and the problem requires to be tackled effectively, not with the current DPF system which appears to be not fit for purpose, nor legislation that cannot be effectively implemented as it stands at the moment. Until these two issues are remedied, then this debate will continue for the foreseeable future.

These comments have been made:

It is illegal. Under current legislation, yes it is. At the moment, a DPF with the workings removed will pass the emission test. So, it cannot be proved. I also wonder if those commenting on the illegal aspect have broken the speed limit which is also illegal.

The web-site which Peter commented on. Surely, they are being responsible by advising the customer on the issues involved which I find commendable.

Warranty. It was mentioned that in the USA that a guarantee had to be provided for emission related parts (6yrs if I remember correctly). Excellent point. This will help safeguard the customer with expensive DPF failures.

Would an extra 40 BHP get a driver around the M25 quicker. No it wont. But it will give him a car with far better driveability and a potential for fuel savings.

In conclusion, as it stands at the moment, we have an expensive system not fit for purpose and legislation that is ineffective. If a customer asks me about DPF removal, I will provide him with the full facts. Once that is done, I know for the majority of the time, I will receive £300 of "easy money" and the customer will have saved an awful lot more.

Regards

Pete M