Friend of mine has a 2 month old scania 380 8 wheeler with EGR it goes like an old Gardner, anybody else got 1?Hows every body finding the euro 4 EGR/SCR job now its been around a while? 
I have recently had a Euro IV (EGR) Scania 480 and a Euro IV (SCR) Scania 560 on trial and found the 480 in particular to be much less fuel efficient than my Euro III Scania 470.
The Euro IV (SCR) Scania 560 was about 10% less thirsty than the EGR 480 but you can add 5% for Ad-blue (which is nearly the same price as diesel ■■? - ripped off again)
So, if a Euro IV truck uses approx. 10% more diesel than Euro III, how is this going to save the planet? 
It used to be a common modification on Pajeros imported from Japan to blank off the EGR. Improved the fuel consumption by 10% and reduced the black smoke on acceleration - go figure.
Scania virtually admit to the Euro 4 being less efficent by fitting the truck with an ‘overdrive’ gearbox. . The only way they can ‘fudge’ the fuel figures.
So we all roll over and do what Brussels says. 
something good:
but you can add 5% for Ad-blue (which is nearly the same price as diesel ■■? - ripped off again)
if you’re interested I’ve just come back from a liquid lunch so may be able to help you there! (BTW i’m in my office job and the only vehicle I’ll be going near today doesn’t have en engine)
something good:
This doesn’t make sense. In the 50’s thick, choking smoke was the issue to addess. In the 70’s it was toxins in the exhuast. Today it’s the CO2 which is pretty much proportional to the fuel used. Makes me wonder if we’d be better off spewing out a little black smoke to save 10% CO2.?
MAN claim to have not lost any fuel economy through using EGR, it seems Scania have so i reckon that leaves Hino, does anyone know how they are managing with it. Seems the way to go is Adblue to me unless someone knows better, its a pain but you cant go throwing fuel away at the price it is.