Perhaps you could drive the car somewhere else besides your house and run it there…A business park parking lot on a Sunday or something…I was thinking the same thing.

 

I sat out to run the regeneration today and I have to say there's gotta be a sensor somewhere reading the "soot values" without displaying anything. Again, my car is brand new, so the test completed almost instantly. A car with more miles would definitely return different results.

I started the car and it let the temperature reach 80 degrees Celsius and it was over before I knew it.


Took about 3-5 minutes to reach the desired temperature.


I can report that I received the same results with or without the fuse seated. Also, the same results were returned doing the standard test while driving.

I guess I'll know more after I get a little build up going.

 

So, were you ever able to find a function that would tell you when the last regeneration was run, the number of them that were run, what the current soot build up is etc? My understanding is that there should be a way to see these sorts of things concerning the GPF.

So to be clear, you ran both types of regenerations with and without fuse 15 in? When you started the regen for the static one did it raise the rpms up and make it very obvious that it was doing it etc?

I find it interesting that it still succeeded with the fuse out? Would it not make sense that the scan tool should have failed to get the regeneration to run when fuse 15 is out, just like the ECU is supposedly failing to initiate a regen if fuse 15 is out (according to Paul Busby and company)?

Thanks for reporting in about this stuff.

 

No problem reporting this. I hope it helps someone somehow.

I can actually the particulate filter status when I view live data, but again, my car is too new. And here it depicts a mileage count since the last regeneration was run.

Lesson learned. But I'll develop more trust in the tool after I view data from another vehicle. I've got an XE outside but it's a gas model and doesn't have the filter.


I probably should have viewed this data first.

 

How many miles are on your F-type?

And did the static regen you ran actually noticeably raise the rpm on the car as some evidence that it was actually doing something?

 

I've got a whopping 477 miles. 😂😂. I know...I know.

I heard a very slight throttle increase... similar to going into Dynamic mode. Same with and without the fuse present.

I honestly don't think it did anything at all. The soot mass value is too low for my car.

 

Wouldn't GPF regeneration occur just by driving the vehicle over 40mph for 10 minutes?

 

It probably would try. Not sure what would happen if the fuse isn't present.

 

It’s not going to do it unless the sensors are telling the ECU the soot build up is beyond a certain level.

 

And if the soot buildup is below the design-specified threshold, why would regeneration be needed?

 

It wouldn’t be needed. I thought you had the impression that just taking it on a longer ride would for sure initiate a regeneration.

 

I presented the issue of the valves required for the GPF to ASR (asr-component.de), a company that produces valve control modules for many brands and models.
Their response:
“There are no problems or error codes with our module. GPF regeneration is also no problem.”

Maybee this helps? So the question remains whether removing the fuse has a different effect compared to using a separate valve control module.

 

So, I guess you know that this company you were talking to does not make the valve control module in the F-type…Are you saying that this company’s valve control module has no bearing at all on GPF regeneration issues? Is that what they said?

If we could figure out who does make it for the f-type and talk to that company I suppose it could be an interesting conversation.

At this point I was pretty comfortable with the idea that there seemed to be at least some relationship between the back valves and GPF regeneration based on the Quicksilver info I posted above.

 

It’s a company that make aftermarket modules for many brands.

And indeed. They say it doensn’t affect the regeneration.

 

I contacted Viezu Tuning like was suggested. I’m looking around at exhaust upgrade options anyway, so it made some sense. At the same time I asked for further comments on this whole issue, and what they propose for a solution…

I was told that the only real solution to the problem of wanting to have the valves open all the time, and not have it create problems, is to replace the cats in order to remove the GPF. If the cats are replaced to remove the GPF, then fuse 15 could be unplugged without creating an issue. That’s what I was told.

I tried to get more specifics/detail on this “solenoid burning out” aspect of things, but I could not. When I asked specifically about that I essentially got a cut and paste of the quotes above that we received already from them.

 

Okay, I completely misunderstood your original post. I thought this ASR company you spoke of made original equipment for different brands. I see they have aftermarket offerings specifically available for our cars. My bad. I guess that is what you meant…

For the benefit of others, they have this product:

https://asr-component.de/gb/flap-con...ntrol-cb2.html

It is pretty darn expensive for what it is, but I mean, if this thing does what it says it does and I can get these fuse 15 concerns off the table without GPF management functions being interrupted/threatened then I’m all in.

Assuming it takes the concerns of this thread off the table and makes them a non-issue, this product has these advantages:

- Fuse 15 is in the car as per normal.
- It’s offered valve control fully integrates with the switch gear of the car (exhaust and mode buttons etc), and they claim that the install is NOT invasive at all. Fully plug and play, it can literally be removed without trace by unplugging it, there are no fuses involved, no ECU remaps, no codes thrown, etc…
- BONUS: Not that there aren’t already solutions established for this on the forum, but the product has a memory function that will cleanly make it such that you don’t have to turn the engine start/stop nonsense off each time you start the car. I hate that thing and planned to address that eventually. This would take care of that too.

Anyway, thanks for posting that up. I’m not necessarily satisfied with a high level statement from them saying don’t worry about GPF management issues.

——-

SOME DETAILS/SPECIFICS THAT MATTER HERE FOR ANYONE FOLLOWING ALONG —>

As we’ve established in this thread, the ECU does seem to ideally want to be able to exercise some control over the back exhaust valves as part of GPF regenerations. So what happens if this ACR device is active and keeping the back exhaust valves fully open for me, and then the ECU decides that it wants to initiate a GPF regeneration cycle, and decides that it wants the back valves fully closed as part of the operation?

Will the ACR device allow the ECU to override my current wishes to have them fully open and let the valves close somehow, and then resume with them being open again post-regeneration?

OR

Does the device do exactly what I described in my post above for Quicksilver’s solution? i.e.: It just responds to the ECU to make it happy, despite the ECU not actually successfully closing the back valves (but thinking it did, so the regen initiation is not prevented, and then the pressure sensors involved compensate for the lack of actual back valve control and successfully regulate the burn cycle anyway).

If ASR is handling GPF issues appropriately as they claim to be, well then it must be one of the 2 scenarios I just described (or something similar).

I have an email into them asking for clarification at this level of consideration/detail. I will post up what they say here for anyone that might be interested.

Thanks again to visie for posting that info about ASR up here in the thread! I feel this company is less visible here in North America, so they were not on my radar at all.

Cheers

 

MY FINAL CONCLUSIONS ON THIS WHOLE THING


I’m starting to feel a bit like I’m talking to myself in this thread, lol, but happy to put this here because it will no doubt be beneficial for current and future peeps having these newer F-types equipped with GPFs…Based on all the information we’ve gathered and talked about so far, this is where this is at for me, and what MY final approach is for dealing with the issue(s) involved with keeping the back exhaust valves open all the time on these cars —>

1) Viezu Tuning

My assessment is that this group has provided a mix of accurate, inaccurate, and speculative (unconfirmed) information. BUT, at the end of the day I feel that they deserve a ton of credit for ultimately making us all cognizant of a really important FACT:

Having fuse 15 out will interfere with the ECU’s ability to initiate GPF regenerations.

Quicksilver gave me clear information about their product that fully backs up this reality, and they talked to me about what they do to manage the issue (see that info above for more detail if you are interested).

I have also recently been in touch with ASR about their valve control modules. I’ve had direct conversations with them specifically about GPF management issues. They too confirmed in those conversations that control over the back exhaust valves by the ECU is involved in GPF management.

Where I feel things get a bit speculative/unconfirmed is this business about an exhaust gas solenoid burning out in the engine bay when fuse 15 is pulled. It’s kind of moot anyway, because the direct issue of GPF regens not running is enough of a problem that says it’s not a good idea. Regardless, I personally do not believe Viezu Tuning has made a definitive causal link between pulling fuse 15 and this failing solenoid they speak of. I even contacted them directly and gave them an opportunity to elaborate and explain further. It took my asking 3 times to get them to say anything about it, and then when they finally did respond I got a cut and paste of the exact same information from them on it that we’ve seen above here in this thread. Happy to let them clearly make the case for what they are saying, but so far I do not believe they have. If there is some truth to this part in the end, well, I guess not pulling fuse 15 should solve it. Better safe than sorry.

Where I feel things get a bit inaccurate is when they told me that basically the only solution is to remove the stock catalytic converters and replace them with aftermarket ones not having integrated GPFs. See the info I put forward above in this thread about how and why Quicksilver’s exhaust and valve controller works just fine with the stock cats/GPFs in place. There I explain in some detail why it’s not a problem. ASR confirmed in my conversations with them that their valve controller products do not interfere with the GPF regenerations for the same reasons.



2) What my final approach will be for dealing with this issue(s)

FIRST:

I am going to be ordering this specific product from ASR:

https://asr-component.de/gb/begin/31...-type_1_type_2

They had a more elaborate (and more expensive) product that I was originally looking at, but it involved splicing into the wiring harness of the car. Didn’t like that. The product I’ve linked here gets the job done without interfering with the ECU’s ability to initiate GPF regenerations, and it’s completely plug and play (no wire splicing). I currently have my “Claws Out Mode” fuse 15 pulling setup programmed to my home link garage opener buttons for a more integrated feel. I will be able to do the exact same with this ASR product, so essentially it will be like nothing has changed.

SECOND:

Just because I will no longer be directly interfering with the ability of the ECU to initiate GPF regenerations once I have this ASR product in place, my typical lower mile short trip driving style with this car (summer-only fun 3rd car) may still be a problem that will ALSO contribute to the ECU not choosing to initiate regenerations (i.e.: Other conditions need to be met).

To deal with this I am buying a scan tool that can monitor soot build up on the GPFs, and one that can be used to force regeneration cycles if need be. There is a nice Topdon branded tool I found that I will likely go with (confirmed to work specifically with our cars for these GPF functions), but there appear to be other options out there (Otofix brand talked about above here in the thread).

THIRD:

This isn’t specifically related to these issues, but I’ve been looking at a “scale path” for getting a bit more exhaust noise that isn’t too over the top without remapping. I think the stock sound with the valves fully open is pretty good, but I would like just a bit more without having to mess around with remapping ECUs etc…

The plan is to leave the stock cats/GPF in place using this ASR valve control, and to upgrade only the back box of the exhaust to something a bit more free flowing (likely the Velocity AP X-pipe solution). This will have the added benefit of also now having fully serviceable back exhaust valves should there ever be issues there. I keep hearing about the seizing/saueaking butt pain that seems to come along with the stock back box for some, and how the valves cannot be replaced. That would be a non-issue with the Velocity AP product (and likely other after market options).

———-

Anyway, these are my final thoughts on this matter. Thanks to the OP for bringing this forward.

Cheers

 

I'm still reading your posts! I don't have the problem but still interested in the outcome. Maybe it is time for a Quicksilver exhaust group buy?

 

That could be one approach, but it’s certainly not necessary to replace any exhaust pieces in order to avoid the problem ;-0

That Quicksilver back box exhaust they have that leaves the stock cats and GPF in place does sound pretty darn good to me over stock…

This is an excellent video showing that exhaust on the new style F-type with stock everything still in place (just back box changed out, and with their proprietary “Sound Architect” valve controller):

 

You’re definitely not talking to yourself in this thread!

I’m also actively looking for the best solution to this “problem.”

Before Viezu Tuning reported a potential issue related to pulling fuse 15, no one really knew what the long-term consequences might be. Now, it seems something may have come to light.

At the very least, it’s made us think.

Cars are subject to increasingly strict regulations, which brings the GPF into the picture. It’s a fairly complex system that we don’t fully understand (yet). But it seems the exhaust valves are involved in the process in the F-Type.

Whether pulling fuse 15 directly causes the “exhaust gas solenoid valve” to fail is still unclear.

Is the issue caused by the absence of the fuse itself, which cuts more than just power to the valves? Or is it because the ECU can no longer communicate with the valves?

For example, I know that BMW and Porsche can control the exhaust valves incrementally, from 0% to 100%. And it needs some information…

With no power going to the valves, the ECU obviously doesn’t know what position they’re in.

But if the fuse is in place and there’s power, can the ECU communicate with the valves via an ASR module? Who knows…

I think I’ll follow the same route as DMeister with ordening a ASR-module.

That feels like the best option for me. Because honestly—when the valves are open, the car sounds exactly the way it’s meant to!