Eolys?

Our most popular forum is for Citroën problems, discussions and chat.
Specialising in AX, BX, ZX, Xantia,C5, Xsara, Saxo and XM. CX, 2cv & Berlingo, all are welcome.NOT for selling cars/parts!

Moderator: RichardW

cachaciero
Posts: 1410
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 6

Re: Eolys?

Post by cachaciero » 18 Apr 2016, 20:17

RichardW wrote: I know some have cleaned them out with pressure washer etc, but given that the effluent may be nasty I'm not that inclined to go down that route!


Well as I have demonstrated cerium is not particularly toxic, oil / soot ash probably more so. In the early days (some 7 years ago!) I would have been concerned about washing out into surface water drains not so much now. I have a used spare FAP sitting on the bench, purchased with a view to cleaning it and having a "clean" spare. Now this filter is claimed to have done 64K which on a 2.2 is close to "life" yet I was surprised at just how clean it appears to be, a thin coating of unburnt carbon on the front face which will come loose with gentle taps, behind that the filter looks quite white.
My plan is to fit a front blanking plate and fill it with acidic brick / pation cleaner and leave it for a couple of days or so then drain reverse flush with a power washer and I reckon that will do it, the patio needs a clean anyway :-)

cachaciero
0x
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC

Online
User avatar
Stickyfinger
Donor 2016
Posts: 8978
Joined: 28 Mar 2013, 22:05
Location: Somset my lovleee
My Cars: Citroen C5x7 Exclusive Tourer
Xantia V6 ACTIVA 3ltr 24v Manual p1
Daffodil the AX
V6.Activa donor car
x 377

Re: Eolys?

Post by Stickyfinger » 27 Apr 2016, 08:43

How did it clean up ?
0x
Alasdair
The ACTIVA, as logical as cubed tumble-weed

http://theresearchsquad.com/

cachaciero
Posts: 1410
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 6

Re: Eolys?

Post by cachaciero » 27 Apr 2016, 13:47

Stickyfinger wrote:How did it clean up ?


Don't know, it's still sitting on the bench waiting attention and it,s likely to be a while as lot'sa of other things keep rearing their head for my attention :-(
Thinking of getting rid of the car anyway and if that happens I won't need the filter, though I may clean it just out of interest.
0x
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC

triumphtoledo
Posts: 118
Joined: 28 Apr 2006, 10:46
Location:
My Cars:
x 2

Mixing different Eolys generations

Post by triumphtoledo » 24 Jun 2016, 15:05

As an aside, I am researching this for Car Mechanics magazine and have been lead to believe that mixing DPX42 and Eolys 176 (and its successor) causes the resulting solution to congeal. This also affects the earlier type of injector that can seize if the wrong fluid is used. So, has anyone tried mixing the two together, to see if this is true.

Oh, also the different Eolys fluid generations produce less ash, which is why DPFs have become smaller in many PSA cars.

R
0x

cachaciero
Posts: 1410
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 6

Re: Eolys?

Post by cachaciero » 24 Jun 2016, 17:55

I hav'nt tried mixing the two but I doubt very much if they would congeal, the base liquid being parrafin in both cases.
As regards seizing injectors again can't see any good reason why this would be.
The quantities injected by the ECU are very different between DPX42 and Eolys 176 which is why on the C5 at any rate the service interval for the filter was substantially increased after about 2004. (introduction of Eolys 176).
On a good engine with the additive injection working correctly the main reason for the filter clogging is build up of Cerium additive plus a small amount of oil ash. So it can be seen less additive injected equates to longer filter life.
The only potential downside I can see to using Eolys176 in place of DPX42 is that there were changes to the regeneration software in the Injection ECU presumably to maximise the benefits of reduced / different additive but what these changes were I do not know.
My choice would be to go with the PAT additive which claims to be suitable for both implementations.
0x
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC

triumphtoledo
Posts: 118
Joined: 28 Apr 2006, 10:46
Location:
My Cars:
x 2

Re: Eolys?

Post by triumphtoledo » 25 Jun 2016, 14:48

Hope you don't mind me commenting on your statements - I am not saying you are incorrect, just adding from what I have learnt from PSA training in Coventry, while researching the issue and would welcome yuour further comments/experience:

I have'nt tried mixing the two but I doubt very much if they would congeal, the base liquid being parrafin in both cases.
MAybe - alothough it is what else is in the mix that may cause this to happen. Even PSA's workshop manuals state that the two are incompatible, from what I have seen.


As regards seizing injectors again can't see any good reason why this would be.

Not sure why - I'll ask again to clarification but I recall the engineer saying something like it is down to the different viscosity/lube additives in the different fluids.

The quantities injected by the ECU are very different between DPX42 and Eolys 176 which is why on the C5 at any rate the service interval for the filter was substantially increased after about 2004. (introduction of Eolys 176). On a good engine with the additive injection working correctly the main reason for the filter clogging is build up of Cerium additive plus a small amount of oil ash. So it can be seen less additive injected equates to longer filter life.

It's not just this - it is also that the different generation fluids have also been designed to produce less ash deposits post-burning.


The only potential downside I can see to using Eolys176 in place of DPX42 is that there were changes to the regeneration software in the Injection ECU presumably to maximise the benefits of reduced / different additive but what these changes were I do not know.

According to PSA, the fluids are fundamentally different and so they are incompatible.

My choice would be to go with the PAT additive which claims to be suitable for both implementations..

Yup, it claims that but I have approached the manufacturer of PatFluid to support its stance and to prove its performance, especially in terms of ash deposits. I await their answers.

R
0x

cachaciero
Posts: 1410
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 6

Re: Eolys?

Post by cachaciero » 10 Jul 2016, 23:09

Hi I do not mind comments at all, I freely admit that much of what I have said is speculative based upon little data.
Now as regards the mixing of DPX and EOLYS I will speculate that not only do I not know exactly what happens when these products are used together or interchanged BUT nor does PSA.
Why do I say this? let me explain.
PSA did not develop the original DPX system that was largely based upon work done by BOSCH, now did BOSCH specify the operational requirement of DPX or was the liquid an "off the shelf" product? Actually it makes little difference as the whole system Particulate Filter Fluid Engine Injection Parameters etc. would have been "tuned" to perform to an agreed specification and supplied to PSA as a package. Somewhere within the contract for this would be words along the lines of "if built to the specified requirements and operated with the specified fluids then the system will work as advertised, however we cannot be responsible if the system is changed or other than approved components are used"
PSA would in all of its documentation training etc maintain the same line, they have to it's one of the ways that they can avoid expensive litigation, standard operating procedure for any manufacturer :-)
Now fast forward a little BOSCH or maybe some one else comes up with an improved system same thing as before build it like this run it using this fluid and it will work.
The thing that PSA won't do is to establish what happens if either components software or fluid are mixed between an early system and a late system, PSA likely don't have the facilitys to do this on their own account and if they go back to BOSCH and ask them to do that work then BOSCH will ask them for a lot of money to do the research. Why would PSA or BOSCH for that matter spend that kind of money doing research which from their perspective has no practical value?
It is far more sensible for PSA to take the line that the fluids are not compatible or no it is forbidden to run an engine with software for DPX42 on Eolys 176, they don't know how well it will work or even if it will work at all but they do know that it will affect the emission certification of the engine so they have to take the line they do.
Frankly I wouldn't believe anything PSA said on this issue, like I said I don't believe they know. For example " Eolys 176 has been designed to produce less ash post burning " again as a top level statement I believe that, but just how much less ash? Looking at the difference in injected quantities between DPX42 and 176 my gut feel is that the major improvement in filter life comes from less cerium content rather than reduced ash production, my gut feel on that statement is that the reduction of ash is a minor component of the improved filter life. Actually thinking about that further as I remember from the original BOSCH write up on the system operation they claimed the major source of ash was from residual lubricating oil burnt in the exhaust not from the combustion of modern low sulphur diesel.

According to PSA, the fluids are fundamentally different and so they are incompatible.
Well for reasons outlined they would say that, "Fundamentally different "is I suspect a bit of hyperbole given that both fluids work in systems whose operating ethos is essentially the same I would be surprised if they were fundamentally different. Would be interesting to ask PSA if they could provide results of test that prove they are incompatible suspect that you might be waiting a long time for that as well :-) Actually even if they were fundamentally different that doesn't automatically make them incompatible.

PAT fluid can't say I am surprised to do detailed trials is expensive and for reasons of emission certification could open a can of worms which could get very expensive. My feeling is that they could probably show that in terms of filter life it approximates the approved fluids and that at the end of the day is going to satisfy the vast majority of their users. If it achieves that the customer base is not going to complain so they can continue to maintain a low profile.

The only real way to prove some of these things is for some one to do it until then it is speculation, thought I might do some of it but my 2001 2.2 is going to be sold on so I probably won't :-(
0x
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC

rmunns
Posts: 483
Joined: 09 Jul 2009, 22:09
Location: Southern Dordogne, France
My Cars: 2009 Citroen C5 X7 exclusive, auto, LHD, 207500km (129000miles)
Citroen Xsara Picasso excl. 2004 2.0 Hdi, RHD, 64000miles. (sold)
Citroen C3 Picasso excl. 2016.

In the past: Renault 16 (in about 1977, for a year). With front pass. seat out transported full bathroom suite from Cambridge to Derby!)
Renault 4TL (in 2011, for a year)
x 2

Re: Eolys?

Post by rmunns » 22 Jul 2016, 06:32

This thread is frightening me a bit. Touch wood, the 2009 C5 X7 excl Hdi165 that I bought with motorway kilometers (it's French) has been totally brilliant, no probs. at all. I bought it a year ago today and in that year I've done 14000km (9000miles). I don't know (a) whether I have FAPS on this car and (b) what to look for on the dash if I do indeed have FAPS and the fluid gets low. I am not too fearful of refilling the tank, but the thought of having to reset something or other with a Lexia is terrifying. I haven't got one nor do I have access to one. I am reluctant to go to main dealer (even more expensive here than in UK). If I get a warning light how quickly does it lead to having to do even more complicated things? Can I burn off with a good run?
Pointers to a good guide on the system and how to maintain it would be very nice.
0x

Online
Hell Razor5543
NOT Alistair or Simon
Posts: 7368
Joined: 01 Apr 2012, 09:47
Location: Reading
My Cars: C5 Mk1 VTR estate, Icelandic Grey (I think she is called "Bluebird")
x 311

Re: Eolys?

Post by Hell Razor5543 » 22 Jul 2016, 07:40

If you post up the last 8 characters of the VIN somebody with the right access should be able to look it up and let you know what the car had fitted when it left the factory.
0x
James
ex BX 1.9
ex Xantia 2.0HDi SX
ex Xantia 2.0HDi LX

C5 VTR HDi estate, 76518762
Out amongst the stars, looking for a world of my own!

User avatar
GiveMeABreak
Forum Admin Team
Posts: 6665
Joined: 15 Sep 2015, 19:38
Location: West Wales
My Cars: '09 C5 X7 2.0 HDi Exclusive Mativoire Beige (The Golden Hornet)
'07 C3 1.6 HDi Exclusive Aluminium Grey (The Silver Hornet)
Past:
'76 GS 1000 Cedreat Yellow (yuk)
'79 GS 1220 Geranium Red
'78 CX 2.4 Turbo Prestige C-Matic Nevada Beige
'84 CX 20 Polar White
'90 XM 2.0 SX Polar White
'93 XM 2.0 Turbo Prestige Polar White
'94 XM 2.0 Turbo Prestige Emerald Green Pearlescent
'98 C15 Romahome White
'99 Xantia 2.0 HDi SX Hermes Red
'01 C5 2.0 HDi SX Wicked Red
'05 C5 2.0 HDi Exclusive Obsidian Black
x 457

Re: Eolys?

Post by GiveMeABreak » 22 Jul 2016, 09:22

rmunns wrote:I don't know (a) whether I have FAPS on this car and (b) what to look for on the dash if I do indeed have FAPS and the fluid gets low.
A) for this HDi engine you will have a DPFS on the car. B) When the additive is low, you will get the SERVICE warning lamp lit, with an audible warning and a message on the multifunction screen.

Now as for the type of additive, you would have to check by the click connector colour as to what type of additive you have and need. Despite all the info in this thread, I'll simply quote from the service Doc notes regarding the 'Modification: particulate filter additive': Here is where the click connectors are in the first diagram and in the second, the table showing the 'rules'. There are of course soft pouches of additive, and these have part numbers, so this concerns the 'rigid' reservoirs.
Chart 1.png
Chart 2.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
0x
Marc

cachaciero
Posts: 1410
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 6

Re: Eolys?

Post by cachaciero » 22 Jul 2016, 14:22

Good info for those of limited knowledge however it does not talk about modification of fluid, just shows a way of identifying what you have and effectively says "fill with same" except in the case of Eolys 176 where Infineum F7995 may be used as a replacement.
Resetting the counters in the ECU with a Lexia is part of the filling procedure and should you not do this then even though you have a full load you will still have the low fluid message.
Further assuming the tank was filled at the same time as the FAP filter was fitted / cleaned then low fluid level is getting pretty close to the theoretical life of the FAP.
The previous statement applies to MK1 and Mk2 C5, X11 may be different but I doubt it.
With the exception of the Mk1 C5 it seems to me that you could effectively add to the 100K miles service the following line :- change FAP and top up Additive :-)
The Mk1 has so many potential "gotchers" in this sense it would be difficult to draw such a hard and fast rule for it. :-(
0x
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC

User avatar
GiveMeABreak
Forum Admin Team
Posts: 6665
Joined: 15 Sep 2015, 19:38
Location: West Wales
My Cars: '09 C5 X7 2.0 HDi Exclusive Mativoire Beige (The Golden Hornet)
'07 C3 1.6 HDi Exclusive Aluminium Grey (The Silver Hornet)
Past:
'76 GS 1000 Cedreat Yellow (yuk)
'79 GS 1220 Geranium Red
'78 CX 2.4 Turbo Prestige C-Matic Nevada Beige
'84 CX 20 Polar White
'90 XM 2.0 SX Polar White
'93 XM 2.0 Turbo Prestige Polar White
'94 XM 2.0 Turbo Prestige Emerald Green Pearlescent
'98 C15 Romahome White
'99 Xantia 2.0 HDi SX Hermes Red
'01 C5 2.0 HDi SX Wicked Red
'05 C5 2.0 HDi Exclusive Obsidian Black
x 457

Re: Eolys?

Post by GiveMeABreak » 22 Jul 2016, 14:46

Hi Tony - reading that the OP had a MKIII or X7, I thought I'd leave it there - but of course, I did forget to mention that it will need a Lexia to reset the counters :)

@ Roger - It's actually not too expensive just having the fluid topped up at the dealer - it is pretty straight forward - the fluid being the expensive part - but they will be able to reset the counter for you. :-D
0x
Marc

rmunns
Posts: 483
Joined: 09 Jul 2009, 22:09
Location: Southern Dordogne, France
My Cars: 2009 Citroen C5 X7 exclusive, auto, LHD, 207500km (129000miles)
Citroen Xsara Picasso excl. 2004 2.0 Hdi, RHD, 64000miles. (sold)
Citroen C3 Picasso excl. 2016.

In the past: Renault 16 (in about 1977, for a year). With front pass. seat out transported full bathroom suite from Cambridge to Derby!)
Renault 4TL (in 2011, for a year)
x 2

Re: Eolys?

Post by rmunns » 22 Jul 2016, 21:44

Thanks all, I guess I'll go to dealer. I did find an old bill for the car March 2014 at 150000km for Eolys change:
€198 of which additive €119. So I guess now €250. Gulp.
0x

triumphtoledo
Posts: 118
Joined: 28 Apr 2006, 10:46
Location:
My Cars:
x 2

Re: Eolys?

Post by triumphtoledo » 26 Jul 2016, 11:21

Well, the article is finished, in which we received data regarding the ash deposits of the OE product (as well as an aftermarket supplier that provided proof that its supplier is the same used by PSA, so you need not always go to the main dealer).

Several one fluid suits all companies refused to share any technical data whatsoever - make your own conclusions from that.

Bosch did not develop the fluid, this was done by Rhodia.

See the next article of Car Mechanics, which looks into this issue on more detail.

Cheers!

R
0x

cachaciero
Posts: 1410
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 6

Re: Eolys?

Post by cachaciero » 27 Jul 2016, 19:48

Did Rhodia develop this against a BOSCH spec? or was this a freelance development by Rhodia which BOSCH used, not really important just curiosity on my part .
0x
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC