I am glad you understood my post! But to stay on topic, mitigated passenger ULSD makes nearly immeasurable changes to the air quality, while offering 20-40% fuel efficiency over unleaded regular/premium. Indeed the emissions difference is not even close to being statistically significant. The populations of hybrids in LA for example has also made almost IMmeasurable changes to the air quality!!!
Given #2 ULSD fuel advantages over unleaded regular/premium of 20-40%; why use more more when less will do? The regulatory agencies truly understand this and will be tempted to tax those that use less (if when the population grows; when more will do as Gagrice has pointed out. Hopefully the per mile levy will NEVER be adopted. This was EASY to do with SUV's i.e., more fuel use=more taxes (per mile driven. They FEAR the reverse with diesel!!!
Actually, it looked like a bad thing on the surface, but digging deeper you see this:
"The equipment that will be moving to other parts of the world will still be meeting U.S. standards and may be cleaner than what they've got now," said Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board. "It's a little bit of a trickle-down effect, but it's better than not doing anything at all.
Posluszny says his gas mileage hasn't changed, and he estimated his total fuel cost savings at $1,885 in May of this year. In addition to lower costs, burning vegetable oil produces fewer pollutants than gasoline or diesel. Posluszny bought a Jeep Liberty to convert, and he is hoping to finish the second vehicle before he returns to the University of Massachusetts in Amherst this September. ``Originally, I saw a poster that said it was possible,'' said Posluszny, who as a freshman at UMass-Amherst, where he studies building materials and wood technology, first learned about converting diesel engines to run on vegetable oil.
Want to make the Toyota Prius seem terribly inefficient and wasteful? Then you’ll need one of these. This is the Loremo L1, a prototype diesel car from Germany that manages an incredible 188mpg.
First shown as a concept at the 2006 Geneva motor show, the Loremo is now a fully running prototype, and will be unveiled at the Frankfurt motor show in September.
It will be available with two engines; a two-cylinder 20bhp turbodiesel ‘LS’ or a three-cylinder 50bhp ‘GT’ turbodiesel, which ‘only’ returns 105mpg.
The Loremo manages this feat through its super-lightweight construction - the standard car weighing just 450kg – and ultra-low drag. Naturally emissions are as low as the fuel economy is high, at under 50g/km of CO2.
The LS hits 62mph in 20sec and tops out at 99mph, the GT 9sec and 137mph. Both cars have five-speed manual gearboxes.
The engine sits in the middle of the car, powering the rear wheels. This means that the rear seats, which are rear-facing, are suitable only for children. Those seats are accessed via the boot, but it’s the way you get into the front of the car that will most surprise. The entire front section of the car hinges forward, dashboard included, and you climb aboard.
Standard kit includes airbags, air-con, sat-nav a radio and MP3 stereo.
The Loremo is in the running for the multi-million dollar Automotive X-Prize, which is for the firm that can create the first commercially viable car capable of over 100mpg. Loremo reckons that the car will start at around €11,000 which is £7500. We can’t wait to try one.
It is the way we do things. If it is too dirty for the USA, we ship it to another country. That includes manufacturing jobs. The dirty exhaust still pollutes the upper atmosphere. You can bet they will try to sell the equipment to states with less stringent regs to start with. You will probably get the bulk of the the earth moving equipment in AZ. Your contractors will welcome cheap equipment. It is further proof that regulations need to be Federal and not each state going in different directions.
One test procedure may be enough. Not one formula that is used to convert old test results to new test results. So far all the EPA has done is take the old test results and used a math formula to come up with new numbers. When will we see ACTUAL test results under the new 2008 test procedures?
I guess I have to email that bunch again to get to the truth.
I think that the quality of WVO varies so much that no manufacturer would want to warrant the engine under those conditions. When I was looking into biodiesel and questioned MB on only accepting B5, that was the answer they gave. No real standards are followed by all the processors of biodiesel. Pacific Biodiesel has been granted use of their B100 for Mercedes diesel. This came about with a celebrity Willie Nelson pushing the issue.
With WVO you have to keep the oil warm or you get clogging problems. It is for the hobbyist. There is a real good savings to be had if you are willing to hang out behind KFC and McDOnalds.
..."One test procedure may be enough. Not one formula that is used to convert old test results to new test results. So far all the EPA has done is take the old test results and used a math formula to come up with new numbers. When will we see ACTUAL test results under the new 2008 test procedures?
I guess I have to email that bunch again to get to the truth."...
I just got to shake my head. :shades: You might anymore need a computer program to get a "REAL" estimate, and you just load the variables to crank out a reasonable (or unreasonable) estimate. Things like weight of the driver, passenger weight, T/P, speed, A/C on/off etc. etc. Most of the stuff is already known. Indeed all this is in the the mpg RANGE stated on a new car sticker.!!!?? Your answer that they just use a "formula" to get the new figures, just reinforces in my own mind how unnecessary this all has become or evolved. Job security takes on a very bizarre turn.
I think my complaint is the obvious error that has come out with this method in regards to diesel cars. The new test results with actual speeds driven on our highways will only enhance the mileage figures for diesels. That is their strong suit. All you have to do is look at the average MPG ACTUAL owners are getting with the recent diesel cars to see how off the formula actually is.
I should just let it slide. As soon as Congress realizes what a waste of money the EPA has become, maybe they will cut their funding and spend it on some other stupid agency.
I think the net effect is the systematic exclusion or squeezing out of cars that really get BETTER (50) mpg AND at freeway speeds and greater! 30 mpg GASSER (like model 1.8T) will do just fine, rather than 50 mpg!!?? I do not think it is any coincidence that almost all of our media ignores the diesel models available in Europe!! Again this is a like model comparison to a GASSER 1.8T which can barely hit 30 mpg. The net effect, the system is by default saying and ENFORCING: burning MORE IS BETTER!!! It really gets down to the RULES that govern whether or not something that gets better mpg hits OUR markets; NOT whether better mpg IS technically feasible as they seem to mire the discussion in!
I mean for lack of bigger injectors and a 6 speed (over a 5 speed) manual, I would more normally get 52 when 50 mpg would do!
So for our Congress to put ANY brain cells toward legislating 35 mpg standards is completely and utterly ludicrious!
... Should we forgive CARB and EPA, because SOMETHING had to be done? My opinion is NO, not untill efficiency has an incentive and MORE attention is paid to greenhouse gases. Even at some expense of what is visable. There ARE other considerations; actually it appears (in the mind) that what we can't see is killing us. Well, we can see the dependence on foreign oil. The Diesel MUST have incentive !!!
Dependence on foreign oil should be enough incentive to get the ball rolling. That and the fact that biodiesel can be made from a huge variety of sources including waste oil. It may be too grass roots for politicians to get excited.
Cut the oil consumption & GHG NOW, fine tune the emissions in a timely manner.
This is almost like the "Wizard of Oz," only this is real life. There are VERY VERY effective elements, including the EFFECTIVE MAJORITY; that on the one hand adamantly demand NO to less dependence on so called "foreign" oil, yet QUASH any and almost ALL efforts to get locate and domicile DOMESTIC oil. Efforts are literally DECIMATED. Less cost and less use are advocated, yet the MORE costly and infinitely LESS available "light sweet crude" are the raw material of choice for unleaded regular and premium refinement. Diesel actually yields/gives 20-40% fuel economy over Unleaded Regular/Premium: yet upwards of 97% of the passenger vehicle fleet uses the higher consumptive(up and down stream in the whole logistical and environmental food chain) unleaded regular/premium.
Proof/evidence is not far off. When was the last time a NEW refinery was built on US soil? Is less than 3% of diesel and alternative fuel use populations a reasonable long term goal? "Other than light sweet crude" costs 30-40% less than light sweet crude.
... One of several problems with the "soon to be" NOx regs and maybe the worst is that the regs just about kill the Diesel strong suit. It's ability turn fuel into rotational energy with heat, because it completely shuts off the next (and potentionally outstanding) area of developement, ceramics. These ceramics might achieve particulate trap temps right where they should be, the combustion chamber. Imagine a chamber so hot that it produces no soot. Yes, these temps would produce an increase in NOx, but the regs are tantamount to trying to make water run uphill. Can you imagine trying to take heat out of an engine producing a petrochemical reaction. The regs force this on the Diesel industry.
The micro level is where they do the most work to keep the diesel population down! As I have mentioned in a and past posts, diesel emissions from the passenger vehicle fleet is not even MEASURABLE, let alone statistically significant !!!! What the regulations allow is the continued dominance of GASSER emissions!!!
This one (diesel engine variants) engine has the capability to almost totally revitalize both the SUV s AND the PU truck segments!!
Why get a V8 Toyota Tundra that might get (engine cut off) downhill barreling in neutral: 20 mpg!!?? (for my .02cents a great truck)
Want literally almost run away acceptance? Drop the diesel premium! (to as low as par with the gasser), while simultaneously cutting back the same or even more on the gasser production.
Also let them drop or cut back those less than profitable small car models the government makes them produce! The ones they keep let em populate them with diesel engines! GM has had great successes in the Corvette, Cadillac, Buick, to name a few! They just need a more across the board increases in successes.
I truly think this is what the anti suv forces are loathed to see happen. Their smoky back room motto might be: Less than 3% of the vehicle fleet is diesel and DYING!
30 mpg can be better than some so called economy boxes! Want to even crush the competition further? Make a serious R & D effort for a 35 mpg variant! A killer application, if I ever heard of one.
... Hypnosis, yeah, yeah, we all know the Fourth World War is going to be fought with sticks and stones (you will not even have a bike), but just in case that's later rather than sooner I am trying to get a certain sedan to seventy MPG (and later eighty).
His arguments sound as hollow as A Gore's. He has owned 50 vehicles in his driving life. Now that he is tired of cars he wants us all to ride a stinking filthy bus across town. If we run out of fossil fuel the buses will be parked as well. We may all have to get a horse. Wouldn't that smell dandy. GHG out the kazoo....
One high quality diesel SUV should hold me for the rest of my driving days.
... Let me restate, "I am for clean air"; however I think it's time CARB, EPA and EURO tell us the rest of the story. For instance, I am for the particulate traps, of course I'd rather the combustion process to be more complete (or maybe *allowed* to be more complete) and eliminate all (or nearly so) soot and any other particulate matter. So, we need particulate traps. Of course it is not generally known, that during these trap "burn offs" the regs are suspended for NOx as the trap has to reach even higher temps (or temps that are *allowed*) that are reached in the combustion chamber, and would create NOx there. Almost diabolical, isn't it ???
quote- Nissan this month said it developed methods to treat diesel exhaust and meet standards in California and other U.S. states that now bar them because of emissions. Europe, the largest market for diesel autos, will adopt rules closer to California's in 2012, making that the time to introduce such vehicles in the U.S., Nissan's Larry Dominique said in an interview.
``That's when it becomes more compelling, in terms of cost, to bring diesel to the U.S.,'' he said in San Diego yesterday.
Nissan, Japan's third-largest automaker, is the latest to add diesel to technologies expected to help meet tougher U.S. fuel-economy and environmental rules. Honda Motor Co., General Motors Corp. and Volkswagen AG have said they'll sell diesels clean enough for California, which has the world's toughest emissions standards.
California bars current diesels because they emit too much particulate matter, or soot, and gases linked to lung and heart disease. Diesel vehicles rival sales of gasoline models in Europe, where the fuel costs less, offers about a 30 percent fuel-economy boost and helps meet regional restrictions on carbon-dioxide emissions. -end
This is most likely the route for all heavy vehicles if the new CAFE regulations go into effect soon. Large Pickups and SUVs likely will have to be in the 25-28 mpg range. Diesel is just about the only solution. Midsized pickups/BOF SUVs likely will have to be in the 30-35 mpg range.
Gagrice's dream vehicle is just over the horizon IMHO.
Yeah, the advent of diesels for pickups makes them more viable for the future. I would think a 3.0 Diesel Ridgeline would get maybe 25 city and maybe 29 highway.
GM is claiming that their v8 light-duty diesel can get 30mpg highway so I would expect a Honda application in the Ridgeline to do better, although I don't know what they get currently.
Diesel in light-duty is the only way that those vehicles can remain viable for non-commercial use in my opinion.
Cummins’ intense focus on research and development turned the once-foreboding EPA regulations into a competitive advantage, as the manufacturer has frequently beaten its competitors to market with technological advancements, said Jay Gore, director of Purdue University’s Energy Center at Discovery Park.
For the first half of 2007, Cummins’ sales were up 11.6 percent and its profits rose 11 percent over the same period a year ago.
Making Cummins’ 2007 performance even more impressive, Foster said, is that it comes in a year when the heavy-duty diesel-engine market—Cummins’ oldschool bread and butter—is down 40 percent.
If Cummins meets its 2007 projections, it would mark the fourth consecutive year of record sales and profits. Cummins is already predicting growing sales in 2008 and 2009.
Engine sales—accounting for 53 percent of revenue—is the biggest driver motoring Cummins from 296th to 221st on Forbes Magazine Fortune 500 list. But Cummins’ power generation, components and distribution sectors are also growing.
“Cummins has become a leader in diesel due to some smart foresight, and wise investments into future development of the technology,” Gore said.
Cummins put sizable investment into manufacturing the 350-horsepower engines for the Dodge Ram pickup. About 170,000 will be made at the Walesboro plant just south of Columbus this year. That’s up from 120,000 in 2003 despite a drop in pickup trucks sold nationwide. Dodge is now the company’s single biggest client.
Not only are Cummins’ engines for the Dodge Ram meeting 2007 EPA regulations, they are already meeting 2010 regulations. Cummins is the only engine maker to do so.
... That is excellent; however it is interesting that they have to be so smart as to stay out of the four cylinder sedan market. I doubt we will ever know the potential gains or losses in corporate MPG, GHG and the actual effect of a slight reduction in NOx regs from our lost sedan Diesel market. And yes there is almost no market, because the auto manufacturers are afraid of the regs.
If the tailpipe exhaust of these fire breathing Cummin's diesels had to be as clean as CARB and the EPA want the VW TDI and MB Blutec to be, they would not be making such bold claims. Because they are in heavy duty trucks they are not under the same regulations. If the V8 engines in all the big PU trucks and SUVs had to be SULEV they would not be allowed to be sold. I don't believe any maker has a PZEV V8 engine. I am not sure there are any V6 engines that can claim PZEV.
... This Toyota deal takes a petro-chemical engineer to understand and a mechanical engineer to service and yet the target market is still Europe. Maybe I should accept CARB and EPA's lead (?) that vehicles that can obtain 60 MPG are part of the problem. Well, of course they are compared to bicycles but I still say the regs MUST be separated between gas and Diesel as an incentive to the latter's better efficiency and less total carbon output, or just to promote bio-Diesel fuels.
That list kind of squashes the myth that Honda & Toyota are the green car companies. Neither has a V6 that is PZEV. How is that possible? Why are they so slow to build a PZEV V6? BMW and GM both have several.
Let's talk Chrsyler into adding a diesel engine to a mini van, but they need to take the mini van back to the original size and use a car diesel engine.
... Cramer has been touting Cummins stock for months. He has 2,000 stocks running around between his ears. Do you think he has any idea that Cummins should be building a quarter of a million more small four cylinder Diesels for our USA market? Of course not, my point is I have my mind around the mechanicals and electronics of the new common rail Diesels but less so around the tailpipe chemistry, and I know that some of the chemical brains on Edmunds don't have a complete handle on the new injection. So what will it take to reach CARB and EPA ?
The tail pipe chemistry is really handled by GLW (Corning, Inc.) an upstate NY company. As you probably know, the Empire State is represented by at least one recognizable Senator, Hillary Clinton.
I think the US can compete with Europe for clean diesels, but I don't think they want too. Ford, GM & Toyota have fought the diesel because they will make less money. Oh, they will make the BIG trucks & BIG SUV's because there is big money there, but the mileage stinks and they are hard to park in the city.
I've had four diesels and I say there is nothing better in the high mountains than a diesel.
... I am sure Cummins and Cat ( Mack is owned by Volvo, Detroit by Damilar Mercedes) can compete with the rest of the world, but actually no manufacturer anywhere wants to deal with CARB and EPA, but there are some attempts at fifty state legal for next year. Again I say there MUST be an incentive of a slight reduction in the NOx regs so that WE can have: less carbon over our heads, less dependence foreign oil, continued advances in Diesel tech (current regs are killing us) and growth in bio-Diesel fuels.
..."I've had four diesels and I say there is nothing better in the high mountains than a diesel. "...
Indeed a twin turbo diesel rig would be my ideal! The bad news of course: it is not commonly available! Still it is such a joy to drive the TDI (turbo diesel injected) through altitudes and still get 48 mpg!!! Much more, if consistently kept at 2,000 to 2,500 RPM's!!??
:shades: I was actually waxing coulda woulda shoulda on bigger injectors and another gear! (6 speed instead of 5 speed) This would convert to app 2 mpg better!
In addition, I had just read an article on the upcoming new 2008 gasser side. In effect, the old midsized cars such as V6 Honda Accord and Toyota Camry will REALLY become FULL sized cars. Probably as a consequence, fuel mileage will not increase, but be more like 19/28 or similar to a 2001 Corvette Z06 V8. The good/bad news will probably be diesel becomes more sensical and diesels might get less mpg than it is capable.
Comments
Given #2 ULSD fuel advantages over unleaded regular/premium of 20-40%; why use more more when less will do? The regulatory agencies truly understand this and will be tempted to tax those that use less (if when the population grows; when more will do as Gagrice has pointed out. Hopefully the per mile levy will NEVER be adopted. This was EASY to do with SUV's i.e., more fuel use=more taxes (per mile driven. They FEAR the reverse with diesel!!!
adjective
strange and amusing.
Certainly one but not the other.
Ricardo announces Tier 2 Bin 2 SULEV Diesel
Since it was shown in Detroit I can only assume that it's one of the US manufacturers.
"The equipment that will be moving to other parts of the world will still be meeting U.S. standards and may be cleaner than what they've got now," said Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board. "It's a little bit of a trickle-down effect, but it's better than not doing anything at all.
"Take our dirty exhaust please, and throw away your even DIRTIER equipment"
IAA In Frankfurt
62.8 mpg (4.5 l/100 km) fuel consumption and 119 g/km CO2: New Golf BlueMotion sets environmentally-friendly benchmarks in the compact class.
Lucky Europe gets all the good cars (broken record)
But why has no car manufacturer offered a "veggie oil conversion kit" straight from the factory?
Why doesn't MB or VW offer a veggie option kit from the factory?
Posluszny says his gas mileage hasn't changed, and he estimated his total fuel cost savings at $1,885 in May of this year. In addition to lower costs, burning vegetable oil produces fewer pollutants than gasoline or diesel.
Posluszny bought a Jeep Liberty to convert, and he is hoping to finish the second vehicle before he returns to the University of Massachusetts in Amherst this September.
``Originally, I saw a poster that said it was possible,'' said Posluszny, who as a freshman at UMass-Amherst, where he studies building materials and wood technology, first learned about converting diesel engines to run on vegetable oil.
Want to make the Toyota Prius seem terribly inefficient and wasteful? Then you’ll need one of these. This is the Loremo L1, a prototype diesel car from Germany that manages an incredible 188mpg.
First shown as a concept at the 2006 Geneva motor show, the Loremo is now a fully running prototype, and will be unveiled at the Frankfurt motor show in September.
It will be available with two engines; a two-cylinder 20bhp turbodiesel ‘LS’ or a three-cylinder 50bhp ‘GT’ turbodiesel, which ‘only’ returns 105mpg.
The Loremo manages this feat through its super-lightweight construction - the standard car weighing just 450kg – and ultra-low drag. Naturally emissions are as low as the fuel economy is high, at under 50g/km of CO2.
The LS hits 62mph in 20sec and tops out at 99mph, the GT 9sec and 137mph. Both cars have five-speed manual gearboxes.
The engine sits in the middle of the car, powering the rear wheels. This means that the rear seats, which are rear-facing, are suitable only for children. Those seats are accessed via the boot, but it’s the way you get into the front of the car that will most surprise. The entire front section of the car hinges forward, dashboard included, and you climb aboard.
Standard kit includes airbags, air-con, sat-nav a radio and MP3 stereo.
The Loremo is in the running for the multi-million dollar Automotive X-Prize, which is for the firm that can create the first commercially viable car capable of over 100mpg. Loremo reckons that the car will start at around €11,000 which is £7500. We can’t wait to try one.
I guess I have to email that bunch again to get to the truth.
With WVO you have to keep the oil warm or you get clogging problems. It is for the hobbyist. There is a real good savings to be had if you are willing to hang out behind KFC and McDOnalds.
I guess I have to email that bunch again to get to the truth."...
I just got to shake my head. :shades: You might anymore need a computer program to get a "REAL" estimate, and you just load the variables to crank out a reasonable (or unreasonable) estimate. Things like weight of the driver, passenger weight, T/P, speed, A/C on/off etc. etc. Most of the stuff is already known. Indeed all this is in the the mpg RANGE stated on a new car sticker.!!!?? Your answer that they just use a "formula" to get the new figures, just reinforces in my own mind how unnecessary this all has become or evolved. Job security takes on a very bizarre turn.
I should just let it slide. As soon as Congress realizes what a waste of money the EPA has become, maybe they will cut their funding and spend it on some other stupid agency.
I mean for lack of bigger injectors and a 6 speed (over a 5 speed) manual, I would more normally get 52 when 50 mpg would do!
So for our Congress to put ANY brain cells toward legislating 35 mpg standards is completely and utterly ludicrious!
Cut the oil consumption & GHG NOW, fine tune the emissions in a timely manner.
Proof/evidence is not far off. When was the last time a NEW refinery was built on US soil? Is less than 3% of diesel and alternative fuel use populations a reasonable long term goal? "Other than light sweet crude" costs 30-40% less than light sweet crude.
============================================================
To the barricades!
Actually folks with attitudes like that ' need to come OFF the barricades;dismantle the barricades. Let the oem's offer diesel models.
Actually interesting that the "hated SUV's" (poster child of gasser indulgence!?) are at 12% of the population!
===========================================================
As every band aid fails....
Tick tock.
BMW"S attempt for 2008
DEER alternatives
link title
I didn't think GM was going to bother with the light diesel market. Guess I was wrong.
Why get a V8 Toyota Tundra that might get (engine cut off) downhill barreling in neutral: 20 mpg!!?? (for my .02cents a great truck)
Want literally almost run away acceptance? Drop the diesel premium! (to as low as par with the gasser), while simultaneously cutting back the same or even more on the gasser production.
Also let them drop or cut back those less than profitable small car models the government makes them produce! The ones they keep let em populate them with diesel engines! GM has had great successes in the Corvette, Cadillac, Buick, to name a few! They just need a more across the board increases in successes.
I truly think this is what the anti suv forces are loathed to see happen. Their smoky back room motto might be: Less than 3% of the vehicle fleet is diesel and DYING!
30 mpg can be better than some so called economy boxes!
One high quality diesel SUV should hold me for the rest of my driving days.
quote-
Nissan this month said it developed methods to treat diesel exhaust and meet standards in California and other U.S. states that now bar them because of emissions. Europe, the largest market for diesel autos, will adopt rules closer to California's in 2012, making that the time to introduce such vehicles in the U.S., Nissan's Larry Dominique said in an interview.
``That's when it becomes more compelling, in terms of cost, to bring diesel to the U.S.,'' he said in San Diego yesterday.
Nissan, Japan's third-largest automaker, is the latest to add diesel to technologies expected to help meet tougher U.S. fuel-economy and environmental rules. Honda Motor Co., General Motors Corp. and Volkswagen AG have said they'll sell diesels clean enough for California, which has the world's toughest emissions standards.
California bars current diesels because they emit too much particulate matter, or soot, and gases linked to lung and heart disease. Diesel vehicles rival sales of gasoline models in Europe, where the fuel costs less, offers about a 30 percent fuel-economy boost and helps meet regional restrictions on carbon-dioxide emissions.
-end
Large Pickups and SUVs likely will have to be in the 25-28 mpg range. Diesel is just about the only solution.
Midsized pickups/BOF SUVs likely will have to be in the 30-35 mpg range.
Gagrice's dream vehicle is just over the horizon IMHO.
Diesel in light-duty is the only way that those vehicles can remain viable for non-commercial use in my opinion.
EPA regs: no burden anymore
Cummins’ intense focus on research and development turned the once-foreboding EPA regulations into a competitive advantage, as the manufacturer has frequently beaten its competitors to market with technological advancements, said Jay Gore, director of Purdue University’s Energy Center at Discovery Park.
For the first half of 2007, Cummins’ sales were up 11.6 percent and its profits rose 11 percent over the same period a year ago.
Making Cummins’ 2007 performance even more impressive, Foster said, is that it comes in a year when the heavy-duty diesel-engine market—Cummins’ oldschool bread and butter—is down 40 percent.
If Cummins meets its 2007 projections, it would mark the fourth consecutive year of record sales and profits. Cummins is already predicting growing sales in 2008 and 2009.
Engine sales—accounting for 53 percent of revenue—is the biggest driver motoring Cummins from 296th to 221st on Forbes Magazine Fortune 500 list. But Cummins’ power generation, components and distribution sectors are also growing.
“Cummins has become a leader in diesel due to some smart foresight, and wise investments into future development of the technology,” Gore said.
Cummins put sizable investment into manufacturing the 350-horsepower engines for the Dodge Ram pickup. About 170,000 will be made at the Walesboro plant just south of Columbus this year. That’s up from 120,000 in 2003 despite a drop in pickup trucks sold nationwide. Dodge is now the company’s single biggest client.
Not only are Cummins’ engines for the Dodge Ram meeting 2007 EPA regulations, they are already meeting 2010 regulations. Cummins is the only engine maker to do so.
Line here: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/08/toyota-enhancin.html#more
PZEV cars
That list is getting longer every year !!! Hurray !!!
Meet me over here:
How will global warming concerns change the way we drive?
Just google their web site.
http://www.corning.com/environmentaltechnologies/
They have probably more than you REALLY want to know about the filtration section!
I've had four diesels and I say there is nothing better in the high mountains than a diesel.
Indeed a twin turbo diesel rig would be my ideal! The bad news of course: it is not commonly available!
In addition, I had just read an article on the upcoming new 2008 gasser side. In effect, the old midsized cars such as V6 Honda Accord and Toyota Camry will REALLY become FULL sized cars. Probably as a consequence, fuel mileage will not increase, but be more like 19/28 or similar to a 2001 Corvette Z06 V8. The good/bad news will probably be diesel becomes more sensical and diesels might get less mpg than it is capable.