milodon:
In france, which is the cheapest country in europe for adblue, it costs around .75€ per litre
i think you need to change fuel cards, with AS24 adblue is only 45c in france and 65c in spain
So how come some trucks are adblue and others aren’t (of the same age)? Are there any Euro 5 trucks not running adblue? If so surely those would be what everyone buys as they’ll be saving ££££££ on not having to buy adblue.
I’m pretty sure scania offer euro5 with egr except on the v8
Rob K:
So how come some trucks are adblue and others aren’t (of the same age)? Are there any Euro 5 trucks not running adblue? If so surely those would be what everyone buys as they’ll be saving ££££££ on not having to buy adblue.
This may explain the choices.
How does the technology affect operators?
There are positives and negatives for both technologies, but with EGR the end user does not have to change the way it operates. Diesel fuel is added to the tank in exactly the same way and the engine does the rest with no additional equipment, additives or maintenance regimes. This is a “Just Diesel, Nothing Else” solution.
The alternative, SCR, requires an extra tank to contain the AdBlue, and drivers need to top up the tank adding extra time to a standard refuelling operation. There are also logistical problems as urea should not be stored close to the standard diesel refilling area and must be stored in temperatures above - 11°C, otherwise it hardens. The infrastructure for the supply of urea for industrial and construction industry is also sometimes not readily available.
While SCR has its disadvantages for the user, it has become the standard for many manufacturers of on-highway equipment and the supply for AdBlue has improved over the last few years. Looking to the future, SCR may also offer a potential solution to reach the next stage of Tier 4 / Stage IV compliance for off-highway equipment.
I read Tier 4 / Stage 5 as Euro 5
Here is an interesting clip.
Truck emissions in perspective
Nobody disputes that the average 44tonnne HGV truck at Euro 5 is seven times more damaging to the environment than a family car. But let’s unpack that for a moment. MAN’s head of UK service and support John Davies points to the classic estimate: “It takes just one truck to deliver groceries to a Tesco store, but some 500 family cars to take the equivalent shopping the few miles home — meaning cars do far more damage.” And much the same applies to the tens of thousands of partially or unladen vans on the UK’s roads every day.
Now let’s look at it another way — comparing truck emissions and fuel efficiencies from the 1990s, pre Euro 1, to today. Do the sums and you’ll find that it would take 35 Euro 4 vehicles to do the same amount of emissions damage as just one Euro zero machine. “Euro 4 vehicles are 35 times more environmentally friendly than their predecessors and Euro 5 takes that even further on NOX, reducing rates from 3.5 to 2g/kWh.”And all of that has happened despite — or some argue, because of — toughening emissions legislation, driving manufacturers to do better with electronic injection systems, continuously regulated turbo compounding technologies, active filters etc.
That’s nice, but if EGR trucks can do the job perfectly well without Adblue, then why the [zb] aren’t we all using them instead of adding £££££££ to our fuel bills with Adblue (speaking from a haulier angle)?
SCR trucks tend to use slightly less fuel than an EGR powered trucks so if you add the ad blue costs on to the diesel cost it works out about the same.
We run a few EGR MANs and have had cooling issues as the system has to be tip top at all times as the EGR system generates more heat than SCR but then again we have had problems with the ad blue systems on our dafs.
I suppose for lots of firms its down to the preference of what makes you like or is the deal attractive at the time.
kr79:
SCR trucks tend to use slightly more fuel than an EGR powered trucks so if you add the ad blue costs on to the diesel cost it works out about the same.
We run a few EGR MANs and have had cooling issues as the system has to be tip top at all times as the EGR system generates more heat than SCR but then again we have had problems with the ad blue systems on our dafs.
I suppose for lots of firms its down to the preference of what makes you like or is the deal attractive at the time.
EGR is the non-adblue right? Your post contradicts Malc’s.
Sorry SCR uses less my mistake. Yeah EGR is non ad blue 
I think the question stems back to the 50’s and 60’s. Why did some hauliers only specify Gardeners and some swore by ■■■■■■■ or Rolls Royce Eagles.
They have a choice and some are stuck in a timewarp, others are gadget freaks and want every new iPhone that is released.
For me a non adblue EGR truck is tops, especially in a big fleet using several drivers per unit, for the same reason a fleet spec truck is suitable for supermarkets but less so down the road in a one driver one truck situation.
I am sure lucrative deals have been won or lost over adblue, so if the manufacturer can offer both types until Euro 6 then the solus salesman can still put new motors into big fleets.
Look at the mad rush to replace vehicles immediately before the Digital tachograph was introduced in May 2006. They queued up for analogues because no one understood those new digital things, nor did they trust them. Old time hauliers don’t like change 
Rob K:
That’s nice, but if EGR trucks can do the job perfectly well without Adblue, then why the [zb] aren’t we all using them instead of adding £££££££ to our fuel bills with Adblue (speaking from a haulier angle)?
there’s also the costs relating to adblue to take into account, as in an adblue truck of a certain euro rating runs cheaper on tolls in places like germany I’m led to believe a few cents less per km maybe?
That’s right so most german hauliers bypassed euro 4 and went straight to euro 5. When euro 4/5 was introduced it had to be ad blue so MAN who had a big marketing campaign championing EGR here were building mainly SCR trucks for there home Market.
The way i understood it was that a truck with EGR would be 0.5mpg worse than the same model before EGR. Where as a truck with SCR would be the same as the older model with the extra cost of the ad blue.
EGR has its faults in cars and vans, where often the best solution is to blank off the EGR valve. Ford transits seem particularly bad for EGR faults, and when you see the pictures of some of the gunged up inlet manifolds it cant be good for the motor.
Going back to the original question, I run Volvo trucks and jumped straight to Euro5 from Euro3 to get the RPC cert. My 08 and 09 13litre FH480’s are marginally better on economy than the earlier 12litre 460 running on the same work with the same trailers.
I’ve not had any problems with the adblue system, but I have an IBC with an electric pump so the adblue doesn’t get contaminated by using an old oil jug to top it up.
Adblue usage usually is compared as a percentage of the fuel used. I keep accurate weekly records of fuel and adblue usage, and the two previously mentioned trucks use an average of 3.3% adblue to diesel.
I have an 11 plate 13 litre FH460 at Euro 5. This uses more adblue, it’s average since April this year when it went on the road is 4.1%, BUT its’ fuel consumption on the same work with the same trailers is between 8-10% better.
My only other experience is with a DAF demo I had for a week, I think it was an XF105 460, this didn’t get quite as good fuel economy but its’ adblue usage was 4.1%.
I generally pay £340-£360 for a 1000L IBC of adblue, dependant upon supplier. Buying the electric pump with meter was expensive to start with (£400), but it means I can accurately monitor usage and keep the adblue contamination free.
Hope this helps.
ROB from what I have heard non adlue used trucks are selling better and for more money, adblue costs are £3 to 500 per year a lot of doe but non adblue I think are cheaper to maintain but I dont know from persanal experiance.
Thanks guys, interesting discussion.
@ colier
coiler:
Going back to the original question, I run Volvo trucks and jumped straight to Euro5 from Euro3 to get the RPC cert. My 08 and 09 13litre FH480’s are marginally better on economy than the earlier 12litre 460 running on the same work with the same trailers.
I’ve not had any problems with the adblue system, but I have an IBC with an electric pump so the adblue doesn’t get contaminated by using an old oil jug to top it up.
Adblue usage usually is compared as a percentage of the fuel used. I keep accurate weekly records of fuel and adblue usage, and the two previously mentioned trucks use an average of 3.3% adblue to diesel.
I have an 11 plate 13 litre FH460 at Euro 5. This uses more adblue, it’s average since April this year when it went on the road is 4.1%, BUT its’ fuel consumption on the same work with the same trailers is between 8-10% better.My only other experience is with a DAF demo I had for a week, I think it was an XF105 460, this didn’t get quite as good fuel economy but its’ adblue usage was 4.1%.
I generally pay £340-£360 for a 1000L IBC of adblue, dependant upon supplier. Buying the electric pump with meter was expensive to start with (£400), but it means I can accurately monitor usage and keep the adblue contamination free.
Hope this helps.
You mention that you’re mpg is marginally better on your euro 5 FHs than it was on your euro 3 FH 460s, but say that the fuel price was the same on your old euro 3 motors as it is now, surely you would be significantly worse off now profit wise as you’re now having to factor in an extra £350 of adblue every ‘n’ period? 41 litres of adblue per 1000 litres of diesel won’t take long to rack up cost wise, especially if you do a lot of distance work.
Pig ■■■■ is for emissions it can reduce fuel marginally, most confuse its job as solely a fuel reducer .
the biggest problem with adblue is it must be perfectly pure as any ingress of fuel or oil or dirt from around the neck of drums will disable the pump and you will be looking at about £3000 to fix it, dont think a new truck will be under the waranty, any thing other than adblue in the system voids it.
im driving a scania 420 56 reg non ad blue thats doing 1100rpm at 56mph which i think is pretty good.
A lot of scanias have an overdrive top gear to bring the revs down. People complain they are gutless but technically 11th is direct top and 12th is for cruseing on the level on the limiter.
kr79:
A lot of scanias have an overdrive top gear to bring the revs down. People complain they are gutless but technically 11th is direct top and 12th is for cruseing on the level on the limiter.
ohhhhh god dont get me wrong the scania gearbox is a nightmare but does seem economical. give the daf zf any day.