Interesting how this thread devolved into the relative merits of the 3 main diesel platforms (powerfully argued by the adherents of each of those 3 great religions). To respond to the OP topic, I too am fully supportive of environmental protection policies. However, these particular (no pun intended) policies are somewhat hypocritical and a clear example of unintended consequences. The inefficiencies offset much, if not all, of the benefits. When the DFP failed in my ‘08 Dodge, I opted to delete and re-chip rather than replace the DPF—basically on the advice of the tech that it would extend the life of the engine and turbo unit. He said the Cummins should get 500,000 Km’s before major work, but that with the DPF units they were seeing that cut down to closer to 300,000 or even less. He mentioned a possible improvement in fuel economy. As it turned out, economy went from 650-700 km per tank (consistent from the time it was new) to over 1000 km and even over 1100 when unladen/highway driving. How much particulates were released into the atmosphere extracting, refining, and transporting those extra 300-400 km worth of fuel for each tank?