Trying to establish whether the use of Adblue on Audi cars (specifically A6 avant) was stopped. Seems that it does seem to be the source of a good number of problems and if models after a certain date did not use this system, I'd like to restrict my search to those. 

Thanks for any enlightenment!

Adblue seems to have a lot of problems for various manufacturers including jaguar and Ford. As long as the correct adblue is put.in.then.yiu should be ok. Funnily enough my wife has a jag xe and it needs topping up. I'm only going to put jag adblue in. Hopefully I'd like to think I'll have more of a comeback if the system says wrong adblue fitted. 

Been using non-Audi Adblue since the car needed it - pay less than £1/litre and get through around 10 litres every 6K miles. Purchase through Amazon with free delivery

Adblue is a urea solution and a recipe that is hard to get wrong - for you own peace of mind get Audi DEF but IMO it is an unnecessary additional expense 

Thanks for the comments - have gone with a 2014 non ad blue A6.

Reviving this thread for any recent views on which type of AdBlue to use, especially with it being a contributing factor to the dreaded EGR cooler blocking aka P2002 00

My car specifically is A5 2.0 190 Ultra (DETA).

1 minute ago, jdragon said:

Reviving this thread for any recent views on which type of AdBlue to use, especially with it being a contributing factor to the dreaded EGR cooler blocking aka P2002 00

My car specifically is A5 2.0 190 Ultra (DETA).

For peace of mind on my wife's Jag I get adblue from the main dealer for peace of mind. However any of your local motor factors would be able to supply a suitable adblue. 

11 hours ago, jdragon said:

Reviving this thread for any recent views on which type of AdBlue to use, especially with it being a contributing factor to the dreaded EGR cooler blocking aka P2002 00

My car specifically is A5 2.0 190 Ultra (DETA).

Not sure how DEF would directly affect EGR as it is applied in the DPF way down stream in the catalytic process. I presume ineffective regen of DPF and subsequent blocking could result in backup of particulates but this would normally be flagged by more frequent regnerations.  

5 hours ago, Envy said:

Not sure how DEF would directly affect EGR as it is applied in the DPF way down stream in the catalytic process. I presume ineffective regen of DPF and subsequent blocking could result in backup of particulates but this would normally be flagged by more frequent regnerations.  

That was my thought, however the Audi TSB suggests it is, along with a special driving profile which I assume means short runs.

How frequently should a DPF regen occur? My research indicates ~300 miles, and I'm seeing this around 280-320 miles.

TPI_2050077-7.pdf

5 hours ago, jdragon said:

That was my thought, however the Audi TSB suggests it is, along with a special driving profile which I assume means short runs.

How frequently should a DPF regen occur? My research indicates ~300 miles, and I'm seeing this around 280-320 miles.

TPI_2050077-7.pdf 748.93 kB · 1 download

Hi your regeneration intervals are spot on, with regard to the adblue its not made of pigs urine which would require vast amounts of purification before use, its made of a component in the fertiliser industry which when mixed with de ionised water creates a synthetic ammonia, when subjected to extreme temperature the greater water element turns to steam and along with the ammonia turns the nitrogen oxide particles, Nox 1 into a inert particle Nox 2 which degrades rapidly in normal atmospheric conditions.

Almost all the branded adblue sold in todays market are the same and unlike fuel do not suffer with blending differences, the consumption of adblue is very dependent on fuel/oil quality I.E. if you use supermarket fuel and cheap engine oil the regeneration factor will be increased as the amount of soot produced by both is accelerated and the DPF blocks more rapidly as the soot particles will be larger and physically more dense, therefore if you use good fuel and any Quantum spec low SAPS oil you are safe, with the additive going into the fuel as long as it has a Cetane booster that raises the burn quality this promotes much smaller soot particles which burn of more comprehensively from the core filters on the DPF.

Steve.

12 minutes ago, Stevey Y said:

Hi your regeneration intervals are spot on, with regard to the adblue its not made of pigs urine which would require vast amounts of purification before use, its made of a component in the fertiliser industry which when mixed with de ionised water creates a synthetic ammonia, when subjected to extreme temperature the greater water element turns to steam and along with the ammonia turns the nitrogen oxide particles, Nox 1 into a inert particle Nox 2 which degrades rapidly in normal atmospheric conditions.

Almost all the branded adblue sold in todays market are the same and unlike fuel do not suffer with blending differences, the consumption of adblue is very dependent on fuel/oil quality I.E. if you use supermarket fuel and cheap engine oil the regeneration factor will be increased as the amount of soot produced by both is accelerated and the DPF blocks more rapidly as the soot particles will be larger and physically more dense, therefore if you use good fuel and any Quantum spec low SAPS oil you are safe, with the additive going into the fuel as long as it has a Cetane booster that raises the burn quality this promotes much smaller soot particles which burn of more comprehensively from the core filters on the DPF.

Steve.

Superb explanation as always, thank you. 

The only diesel I use is Esso. And i'm using the Archoil now instead of the Millers.

Oil is either Comma Prolife 5w30 or Castrol Edge 5w30 ll. I typically change oil (drain from sump plug) and filter every 6 months, which is usually around 8-10k miles.

What are Audi referring to as "reducing agent" and if it's the AdBlue, how is that even getting back to the EGR cooler???

1 minute ago, jdragon said:

Superb explanation as always, thank you. 

The only diesel I use is Esso. And i'm using the Archoil now instead of the Millers.

Oil is either Comma Prolife 5w30 or Castrol Edge 5w30 ll. I typically change oil (drain from sump plug) and filter every 6 months, which is usually around 8-10k miles.

What are Audi referring to as "reducing agent" and if it's the AdBlue, how is that even getting back to the EGR cooler???

Hi the term Audi use is reducing agent, it is actually adblue and the term is derived from the system our cars use which is Selective Catalytic Reduction, the system works thus, you will have three sensors before the cat one is an exhaust gas temp sensor the other is an oxygen sensor the last one is a Nox sensor of which there are two, the correct designation are upstream for before cat and downstream post cat, before all of these is what is basically a small captive shower head which when commanded by the ECU will spray adblue into the exhaust stream pre the first bank of sensors, the first NOX sensor registers the amount of Nox in the stream and the second registers the particles after the adblue spray and depending on its in formation log may request more adblue, the whole mixture is then fed into the DPF which does its thing with the soot particle entrapment, here lies the problem to make the exhaust cleaner still there is an EGR cooler at the back of the DPF which is attached to another EGR valve which when opened by the ECU at low speeds sucks the already treated exhaust gas through the cooler with drastically cools the gas to so when it is reintroduced in to the engine to be re burnt by the combustion cycle it won't be to hot which reduces combustion temps and burns any Nox 1 that escaped the first time, as I said the main culprit for the blockages is the PCV system as this adds extra engine oil vapour and water vapour neither of which burn very efficiently if at all. thats why Audi recommend longer faster journeys as at higher speeds both EGR valves are shut as the engine needs as much oxygen rich air as it can get to maintain the speed therefore it burns slightly hotter and burns off a lot of the accumulation from town/city driving.

Steve.

Understood, thank you. Hence the name Exhaust Gas Recirculation valve.

It's appalling 😄

All being well I'll get more than 70k miles out of the next one.

20 hours ago, jdragon said:

Understood, thank you. Hence the name Exhaust Gas Recirculation valve.

It's appalling 😄

All being well I'll get more than 70k miles out of the next one.

Hi I am up to 21,500 and no sign yet although I am considering changing it as I have heard good reports of extra power and drivability, got a seven hundred and fifty mile round trip in mid June so I will be making my assessment from there, yes we have gone from Euro 4 to 6 in about fifteen years and in saying that the EGR technology has improved in leaps and bounds but we still live with the problem of the sticky tar that is produced by the crankcase ventilation system I am currently researching the benefits of a Catch Tank system which apparently removes 90% of the water vapour and a lot of the engine oil solids, the only pain is draining it every week.

Steve.

1 hour ago, Stevey Y said:

Hi I am up to 21,500 and no sign yet although I am considering changing it as I have heard good reports of extra power and drivability, got a seven hundred and fifty mile round trip in mid June so I will be making my assessment from there, yes we have gone from Euro 4 to 6 in about fifteen years and in saying that the EGR technology has improved in leaps and bounds but we still live with the problem of the sticky tar that is produced by the crankcase ventilation system I am currently researching the benefits of a Catch Tank system which apparently removes 90% of the water vapour and a lot of the engine oil solids, the only pain is draining it every week.

Steve.

21,500 isn't a lot. Changing what? The EGR valve/cooler?

My A4 always ran better after I had cleaned the EGR valve.

How's your other car running with 120k miles? I think you said that's a DETA like mine.

Do you have a link for the catch tank system?

 

21 hours ago, jdragon said:

21,500 isn't a lot. Changing what? The EGR valve/cooler?

My A4 always ran better after I had cleaned the EGR valve.

How's your other car running with 120k miles? I think you said that's a DETA like mine.

Do you have a link for the catch tank system?

 

Hi my fault forgot to put the 1 in front of the 21,500, I will let you know as soon as I come up with a suitable catch tank as some I have viewed have an immediate design flaw as there is a vent on top to relieve pressure/fumes but are a primitive design and will also allow air in after the MAF which will cause no end of problems as its just like having a built in air leak which will promote excessive regenerations thus knackering the DPF in record time, I wish both our engines were as simple as the A4 but unfortunately the SCR system is a whole new ball game, you have to do the research before indulging in any mods to the existing system, just been looking for them on the net. My engine is a CNHA but believe me they are very similar with only subtle differences.

Steve.

Steve.

1 hour ago, Stevey Y said:

Hi my fault forgot to put the 1 in front of the 21,500, I will let you know as soon as I come up with a suitable catch tank as some I have viewed have an immediate design flaw as there is a vent on top to relieve pressure/fumes but are a primitive design and will also allow air in after the MAF which will cause no end of problems as its just like having a built in air leak which will promote excessive regenerations thus knackering the DPF in record time, I wish both our engines were as simple as the A4 but unfortunately the SCR system is a whole new ball game, you have to do the research before indulging in any mods to the existing system, just been looking for them on the net. My engine is a CNHA but believe me they are very similar with only subtle differences.

Steve.

Steve.

I sense a new thread coming on this catch tank topic 😎

The VAG specialist firmly advised against doing an AdBlue and/or EGR delete. They said it's ok initially but when you hit the 15k mark, all manner of problems occur because the system runs hotter.

On 5/29/2022 at 8:14 PM, jdragon said:

I sense a new thread coming on this catch tank topic 😎

The VAG specialist firmly advised against doing an AdBlue and/or EGR delete. They said it's ok initially but when you hit the 15k mark, all manner of problems occur because the system runs hotter.

Hi yes down the road when you are buying new Turbos every two years because they are burnt up and perhaps the occasional valve because they are burnt, the advent of EGR gave the manufacturer an outage on metal components for engines as they are now running 40% cooler therefore the components inside the engine don't have to withstand the thermal stresses that the older engines suffered as the old rule of thumb was the hotter they run the more efficient the burn and more power, trouble is the hotter they run the more Nox 1 they produce, everything is now designed to run cooler so the metallurgy changed with it.

 

 

Steve.

Reposted here

 

Edited October 17, 20223 yr by jdragon

On 5/31/2022 at 8:08 PM, Stevey Y said:

Hi yes down the road when you are buying new Turbos every two years because they are burnt up and perhaps the occasional valve because they are burnt, the advent of EGR gave the manufacturer an outage on metal components for engines as they are now running 40% cooler therefore the components inside the engine don't have to withstand the thermal stresses that the older engines suffered as the old rule of thumb was the hotter they run the more efficient the burn and more power, trouble is the hotter they run the more Nox 1 they produce, everything is now designed to run cooler so the metallurgy changed with it.

 

 

Steve.

Morning Steve,

 

This sounds logical. Do you have any empirical proof though? Know of multiple people who have removed these systems then at x miles had heat related major component failures? Or know of the actual adjustments to the mix in terms of the CNHA construction methods and BOM compared to older units not relying on SCR/AB etc?

Your theory makes sense but I would surmise those who "recalibrate" also have ultimate performance increased (boost/injector duration...therefore heat loading) and drive the car more aggressively.

 

Thanks

DU!

7 hours ago, DirtyUltra said:

Morning Steve,

 

This sounds logical. Do you have any empirical proof though? Know of multiple people who have removed these systems then at x miles had heat related major component failures? Or know of the actual adjustments to the mix in terms of the CNHA construction methods and BOM compared to older units not relying on SCR/AB etc?

Your theory makes sense but I would surmise those who "recalibrate" also have ultimate performance increased (boost/injector duration...therefore heat loading) and drive the car more aggressively.

 

Thanks

DU!

Hi if its proof you need there must be hundreds of posts on here the prime one being look through the C7 forum for a guy called Big Townz he had god knows how much mechanical work and remapping done to his engine, the end result total failure, in essence the whole idea behind Ultra technology was to have a Diesel engine that ran a lot cooler thus producing less Nox1, this was achieved by using a larger coolant radiator with the addition of a low pressure EGR system with its own cooler which operates from start up to cut down Nox emissions until the main EGR valve opens when the engine is up to temperature, there is a fine balance between both systems that are a key to keeping combustion temperatures within limits so producing less Nox the remaing Nox is felt with by the SCR which injects adblue as required to cope with any Nox increase therefore deleting the EGR and increasing the gas temperature by about 40% has a negative effect on the SCR which will over inject to try and compensate, the next stage is delete the adblue system which creates even more heat, it is well known that a hotter running diesel will perform better and give better MPG the problem with tis is that in production of the engine they found the composite of the metals used could be downgraded as for all intents and purposes the engine was never going to run temperatures at the upper level, this saved money, running at higher than manufacturers temps causes turbo failure and even in some cases valve failure which is well documented on the internet mostly on US and European sites, my opinion from ownership is that these engines are already running on the edge therefore why put more strain on them.

Steve. 

15 hours ago, Stevey Y said:

 in production of the engine they found the composite of the metals used could be downgraded as for all intents and purposes the engine was never going to run temperatures at the upper level, this saved money, running at higher than manufacturers temps causes turbo failure and even in some cases valve failure which is well documented on the internet mostly on US and European sites, my opinion from ownership is that these engines are already running on the edge therefore why put more strain on them.

Steve. 

Thanks Steve, I appreciate your time to explain the fundamentals but I understand the operation of EGR, DPF, AB and associated systems, NOx et al. Amongst other things professionally, I hold AAE through the IMI and have worked in the industry at various different roles and levels of contact.

What I'm particularly keen to know is what I've quoted above, the source or technical data to support the downgrade of metal composition in order to reflect lower target operating temperatures, failure rate of turbos based on higher combustion temps?

I will look up the posts/user you mention but as I understand it removal of EGR/DPF/AB should not create unmanageable combustion temps if the recalibration is correct and sub-systems are working.

Turbo- As all EGR gas is directed into the engine via the turbo compressor, and this air load is at a higher temp than the outside air temp, then removal will not give an additional heat load on the compressor side. Effectively the EGR will follow the solenoid valve V339 closed flow state which does not put risk on the compressor. Turbine side will be effected by combustion temps (will comment separately) and turbine back pressure set by downstream back pressure(s). This would be DPF soot loading state, EGR cooler flow state and J88 exhaust door control state which comes off the DPF. This would need to be mapped open. DPF regen functionality maintained or DPF core removed. A fixed close state of the EGR V339, similar to the EGR cooler being blocked would increase pressure at the DPF and seen by the turbo. Which is why correct removal of the DPF backpressure is required, be it through maintenance or physical modification. Removal of AB would not change turbo operating environments other than as mentioned with combustion chamber temps. Back pressure from Oxi Cat would remain consistent.

Combustion temps- the engine has three partial coolant circuits to ensure heat distribution is based on demand. This takes into account the engine, trans (if auto) and interior heating demands. Removal of EGR cooler feature will have adverse effect on engine warm up time and increase initial engine friction and wear rate, mpg etc. I'd say that's an almost negligible value though. However part of the warm up cycle is via static coolant flow, the pump is commanded off (no flow to EGR cooler or cylinder head) so whilst EGR will not warm a cold engine anymore, the cooling system is perfectly capable of rapidly warming engine via closed thermostat and static coolant flow conditions. Of the three coolant circuits, the micro-circuit runs around the cylinder head and around the combustion chamber (nearest valve seats). This circuit is off during warm up with flow directed through the heater matrix for fast cabin warm-up. The V488 coolant support pump is controlled by the ECM to directly manage the cyl head temps. Again even if load or speed (rpm) is in a high state, V488 is on constantly. The high temp circuit is run/controlled via the stat and radiator. 

The charge air cooler will manage intake temps (after the EGR/AB is added). It's efficiency is vitally important and they are often found to be gummed/carbonned up thanks to EGR. V188 charge air pump controls coolant to the charge cooler based on manifold temps. The pump can be off/ cycled/cont on depending on charge air temp vs target. A wise re-calibration will adjust these values! Pre and post temp sensors are used.

General fuelling takes into account EGR position from G466 and three EGT sensors. Exhaust gas temp is the ultimate limiting factor of the turbos turbine and this value is managed by the ECM. Oil temp G266 sensing and various intake temps including the charge cooler all contribute to controlling combustion chamber temp. Lets also not forget the N75 wastegate control (VNT between high flow and steep working angle/no boost) which will ultimately dump off any pressure (heat) between the cylinders and turbine.

Summary- if a recalibration is done correctly (as opposed to just removing duty cycles or DTC activation errors from memory) then their should be no risk to the mechanicals.

Removing EGR will reduce some spool rates though as it retains the entire exhaust mass flow in front of the turbocharger turbine. The turbocharger responds better, particularly under part-load. This allows for higher charge pressures with it in situ.

I have written this whilst working and have not proofed it. Apologies for any typos/ nonsensical ramblings... 

6 hours ago, DirtyUltra said:

Thanks Steve, I appreciate your time to explain the fundamentals but I understand the operation of EGR, DPF, AB and associated systems, NOx et al. Amongst other things professionally, I hold AAE through the IMI and have worked in the industry at various different roles and levels of contact.

What I'm particularly keen to know is what I've quoted above, the source or technical data to support the downgrade of metal composition in order to reflect lower target operating temperatures, failure rate of turbos based on higher combustion temps?

I will look up the posts/user you mention but as I understand it removal of EGR/DPF/AB should not create unmanageable combustion temps if the recalibration is correct and sub-systems are working.

Turbo- As all EGR gas is directed into the engine via the turbo compressor, and this air load is at a higher temp than the outside air temp, then removal will not give an additional heat load on the compressor side. Effectively the EGR will follow the solenoid valve V339 closed flow state which does not put risk on the compressor. Turbine side will be effected by combustion temps (will comment separately) and turbine back pressure set by downstream back pressure(s). This would be DPF soot loading state, EGR cooler flow state and J88 exhaust door control state which comes off the DPF. This would need to be mapped open. DPF regen functionality maintained or DPF core removed. A fixed close state of the EGR V339, similar to the EGR cooler being blocked would increase pressure at the DPF and seen by the turbo. Which is why correct removal of the DPF backpressure is required, be it through maintenance or physical modification. Removal of AB would not change turbo operating environments other than as mentioned with combustion chamber temps. Back pressure from Oxi Cat would remain consistent.

Combustion temps- the engine has three partial coolant circuits to ensure heat distribution is based on demand. This takes into account the engine, trans (if auto) and interior heating demands. Removal of EGR cooler feature will have adverse effect on engine warm up time and increase initial engine friction and wear rate, mpg etc. I'd say that's an almost negligible value though. However part of the warm up cycle is via static coolant flow, the pump is commanded off (no flow to EGR cooler or cylinder head) so whilst EGR will not warm a cold engine anymore, the cooling system is perfectly capable of rapidly warming engine via closed thermostat and static coolant flow conditions. Of the three coolant circuits, the micro-circuit runs around the cylinder head and around the combustion chamber (nearest valve seats). This circuit is off during warm up with flow directed through the heater matrix for fast cabin warm-up. The V488 coolant support pump is controlled by the ECM to directly manage the cyl head temps. Again even if load or speed (rpm) is in a high state, V488 is on constantly. The high temp circuit is run/controlled via the stat and radiator. 

The charge air cooler will manage intake temps (after the EGR/AB is added). It's efficiency is vitally important and they are often found to be gummed/carbonned up thanks to EGR. V188 charge air pump controls coolant to the charge cooler based on manifold temps. The pump can be off/ cycled/cont on depending on charge air temp vs target. A wise re-calibration will adjust these values! Pre and post temp sensors are used.

General fuelling takes into account EGR position from G466 and three EGT sensors. Exhaust gas temp is the ultimate limiting factor of the turbos turbine and this value is managed by the ECM. Oil temp G266 sensing and various intake temps including the charge cooler all contribute to controlling combustion chamber temp. Lets also not forget the N75 wastegate control (VNT between high flow and steep working angle/no boost) which will ultimately dump off any pressure (heat) between the cylinders and turbine.

Summary- if a recalibration is done correctly (as opposed to just removing duty cycles or DTC activation errors from memory) then their should be no risk to the mechanicals.

Removing EGR will reduce some spool rates though as it retains the entire exhaust mass flow in front of the turbocharger turbine. The turbocharger responds better, particularly under part-load. This allows for higher charge pressures with it in situ.

I have written this whilst working and have not proofed it. Apologies for any typos/ nonsensical ramblings... 

Hi yes the dynamics you state are correct but its not the EGR that blocks everything up but the addition of crankcase gasses which contain high levels of steam/engine oil vapour and its universally accepted engine oil is not a very combustion friendly medium due to the fact it maintains its molecular structure at high temperatures, the fact remains that if you spend hours researching this as I did on the net the pros and cons are all there for anyone to peruse, the manufacturers spend millions of Euros on development to meet the compliance required for emissions and in my opinion if you can live with this and fixing the things that go wrong you can still enjoy the longevity associated with the older models, the key factor is NOX1 reduction as if you take in to account the effect of nitric acid on the respiratory system you then have to ask the question is my enjoyment of my diesel potentially worth a life that is shortened by my vehicles modifications, there are lots of different opinions on what heat does and plenty of blogs on post remap turbo failures due to heat, this debate will rage on until the eventual demise of the Diesel engine in cars, it a bit like who is the true god Christ, Allah, or Jehovah and that ones been going on for hundreds of years with each side firm in the belief that they are right, last and not least in view of the development times and costs do you realistically believe you can delete all these items and still obtain the same results as the manufacturer?.

Steve.

On 11/28/2025 at 8:38 PM, Stevey Y said:

 the key factor is NOX1 reduction as if you take in to account the effect of nitric acid on the respiratory system you then have to ask the question is my enjoyment of my diesel potentially worth a life that is shortened by my vehicles modifications,

 

there are lots of different opinions on what heat does and plenty of blogs on post remap turbo failures due to heat

 

in view of the development times and costs do you realistically believe you can delete all these items and still obtain the same results as the manufacturer?.

Steve.

Hi Steve,

 

I'm not looking to debate, nor am I looking to modify. Just interested in your statements about this engines downgrading on materials selection due to E6 subsystems being applied allowing for lower operating combustion temps (and any inherent risks therefore from adapting the original intended use case). So far I have not seen/read of anything other than conjecture. Still genuinely interested to see some technical information that supports your theories though, if you have it?

 

Regarding PCV and oil mist. VAG revised the PCV and included an Air/Oil separator although that should be seen as a maintenance item.

4 hours ago, DirtyUltra said:

Hi Steve,

 

I'm not looking to debate, nor am I looking to modify. Just interested in your statements about this engines downgrading on materials selection due to E6 subsystems being applied allowing for lower operating combustion temps (and any inherent risks therefore from adapting the original intended use case). So far I have not seen/read of anything other than conjecture. Still genuinely interested to see some technical information that supports your theories though, if you have it?

 

Regarding PCV and oil mist. VAG revised the PCV and included an Air/Oil separator although that should be seen as a maintenance item.

Hi from about 2000 most cars produced have a PCV that  separates oil/air its a pulse diaphragm which stops excessively large droplets of oil from being reintroduced in to the combustion process, they never quoted it as being fool proof thus it still introduces oil vapour hence the sludge, I actually made a catch system that bypassed this as it vented any gas via a filter, the car ran marginally better but then you get the scenario whereby you had to wash the filter once a month and empty the tank every couple of weeks, not ideal when running a taxi especially during the winter months.

As for the technical information, when I did my research late 2019 I did a fair amount of archive which I have had to delete about a year after to free up some space for my parts system from memory most of it was from German VAG forums, never thought I would be called on to resurrect it though I have tried recently before it occurred to me that why was I doing this as it has no benefit to me as it no longer is of any concern therefore I came to the conclusion that this is all about trying to prove who knows what, who has the greater knowledge, judging by the qualifications and  trade contacts you have I would think you would have far .better access to the data you require, but you have still not answered as to weather you think that even if you remove and delete various systems you can still replicate the same emissions standard as built, therefore I am happy to take a step back and considering I took my vehicle to over 270k using the as built system, so if you are not going to delete anything or change any parts its a bit of pointless exercise.

Steve.