Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Diesels in the News



  • jkinzeljkinzel Posts: 735
    You know, having read the article about the Volt, it brings to mind the Movie, “Who Killed the Electric Car”. Is it going to happen all over again, GM makes an electric car that is so successful at solving environmental issues and is so popular with the public that it threatens (watch the movie and draw your own conclusion) who/what ever to the point that it is stopped and scrapped.
    Stay tuned.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,440
    Essentially we as citizens or consumers, in the process of partaking in a common interest (this thread) have solved the conceptual energy issues in the short term. A plug in electric with a diesel engine (for those that obviously want or need it) with a electrical range of 100,200,300 miles, have solved the mpg conundrum. So a Jetta with 50 mpg (14.5 gal) can go 700 miles and with plug in can go 800,900,1000 miles. So 50 mpg now turns into 57, 64.28, 71.4 mpg. and with almost ZERO emissions for 100,200,300 miles. All this with NO legislation/strong armed/force tactics.

    Compare and contrast this with how "regulators" want to solve this. NEW EPA mileage estimates are up to 20% lower than so called "old" EPA estimates. There is real talk of 4 per gal unleaded regular. Getting a new unleaded regular refinery is literally a political impossibility. Even if one were granted, it would be tied up for literally years and litigation/s preceeding this could cost millions, if not billions. To force NEW regulations will cost literally BILLIONS in new investments for those mythical cars that get 30-42 mpg!!!!!!! ????
  • winter2winter2 Posts: 1,801
    This engine is larger than the engine it replaces but gets better FE and is 50 state certified through 2010. It is a new, completely from the ground up engine which is cleaner and yet more powerful than the V-8 diesels offered by GM or Ford.

    Yes, it does not seem to make sense. I have a diesel in my Jeep Liberty. It displaces 2.8L and is a four cylinder, a rather large one at that but still gets very good FE and will pull 5000 pounds and still get better than 20 MPG. I get close to or exceed 30 MPG on long trips. My Jeep is no fly weight at over 4300 pounds and has the aerodynamics of a cinder block.
  • winter2winter2 Posts: 1,801
    Do you have a link to these new engines from Cummins?
  • hwyhobohwyhobo Posts: 265
    This engine is larger than the engine it replaces but gets better FE and is 50 state certified through 2010. It is a new, completely from the ground up engine which is cleaner and yet more powerful than the V-8 diesels offered by GM or Ford.

    I have no problem with that logic. I just wish Dodge gave an untapped market an option of a small (~3.0l), ultra-efficient diesel in a 1500 for those who only need it for around-the-house duties and occasional weekend trips.

    I perfectly understand why my friend who does landscaping would need a large engine with significant torque (or those who tow), but I strongly believe there is a significant market of those who never perform any such demanding tasks, yet would love the utility of a full-size pickup.

    I also believe that like me, many of those people will not buy a gas-guzzling current 1500 not because we are looney tree huggers, but because any unecessary waste of resources (any resources) is repulsive to our nature.
  • jkinzeljkinzel Posts: 735
    Nicely said hwyhobo.

    In that list of resources I include my hard earned money and if I can go from an 18mpg gasser to 30mpg light diesel (hypothetical figure at this time) then I save that hard earned recourse.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,440
    Indeed a diesel that gets 25-35 mpg would add a capital U to the concept of UTILITY.
  • jkinzeljkinzel Posts: 735
    then I save that hard earned recourse.

    Perhaps I meant “resource”.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,440
    The ML 320 is the same weight as the Toyota Landcruiser 1991-1997(EPA 13c/15h) and the DIESEL MB will get 23 city/27.5 highway. Essentially this is app 45%/83% better fuel mileage depending upon where one is coming from! Again some so called small economy cars do not get 27.5 mpg!! How can we get more no brainer than this?
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 31,135
    They missed the R320 CDI. Four models now in MB showrooms. Well, most are sold by the time they roll off the truck. I look for MB to ramp up US production of the diesels to meet the demand. With the Grand Cherokee diesel that makes 5 for DC none for GM, Ford and Toyota. The new Big 3 may get caught snoozing.
  • winter2winter2 Posts: 1,801
    I just wish Dodge gave an untapped market an option of a small (~3.0l), ultra-efficient diesel in a 1500 for those who only need it for around-the-house duties and occasional weekend trips.

    Unfortunately that will not come to pass. I grant you that a 3.0L turbodiesel makes wonderful torque (nearly 400 lb-ft for the MB version) but Dodge/Chrysler is of the opinion that a larger displacement engine that the host, Kcram, mentioned will serve it better. First of all the larger displacement engine will be more stoutly built than the MB offering and will be easier to maintain and service. Another issue is that most Americans beat the living daylights out of their pickups and the MB engine as good as it is would not hold up to that type of abuse/pounding. Thirdly, the engine is being produced domestically by Cummins which has a very good reputation in the larger Dodge trucks, thus that same reputation will carry over to the smaller diesels. Four, Cummins has developed a good emissions system for their engines, so why re-invent the wheel?

    MB does have a 4.0L V-8 turbodiesel that puts out over 300 HP and over 500 lb-ft of torque. I believe that engine will appear in the GL class.
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    Cummins press release announcing DaimlerChrysler as the primary customer:
    Cummins Press Release Oct 11 2006

    The USDOE pdf file regarding the development:
    Cummins Work Toward Successful Introduction of Light-Duty Clean Diesels

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • bristol2bristol2 Posts: 736
    That Cummins powerpoint presentation is one heck of a post!

    You have some good contacts.

    I wonder how fast they can be to market?
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Another indication that Dodge made a BIG MISTAKE when it killed the plans to produce ESX-3 Diesel/Hybrid sedan:

    Biodiesel Jetta uses less fossil fuel than Prius
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 31,135
    I think it was timing. I am sure they would not have gotten it by CARB without ULSD being in place. So it would have been a big loser. Lots of IFs in the auto business.
  • hypnosis44hypnosis44 Posts: 483
    The Great American Sales machine stumbles on with Great Public Relations and sales blurbs - but the usual very bad scholarship and math. The entire life cycle of the vehicles would need to be compared as well, as the fossil fuel involved in all aspects of growing crops including the additional production of tractors and all ancillary energy components.
  • roland3roland3 Posts: 431
    ... Once For All, I don't know what is in the snake oil additives but I am sure it is not sulfur. Sulfur does NOT provide lubricity but the refinery process of removing sulfur does lower lubricity and the refiners are adding a lubricity agent.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    Jeep Grand Cherokee

    I would love to have a Dakota with the 3.0L diesel.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,440
    this is hidden in plain sight. Perhaps I should not have posted this. :( :)

    The local fuel station sells unleaded regular 3.39 and #2 ULSD 3.05 per gal.

    The 2003 VW Jetta EPA''s are 24/31, 24/31, 42/49 mpg 2.0/1.8T/1.9 TDI. So the cost per mile driven figures are: $.113/.113/.061. #2 ULSD is .052 cents or 46% cheaper, per mile driven.

    An apples to oranges comparo with a Civic with the same commute being common are: 38/50 mpg, (3.39/38=.0892105)(3.05/50=.061) or 31.62% cheaper.

    But then again in Venuezula the price of gas at the pump is .12 cents!

    "What does gasoline cost in other countries?"

    By John W. Schoen
    Senior Producer

    link title
  • hypnosis44hypnosis44 Posts: 483
    See post 2523 by the HOST.
  • winter2winter2 Posts: 1,801
    In parts of Montgomery County MD, just north of Washington D.C., ULSD 2.839 to 2.899, UL regular 3.039 to 3.199.

    So why buy spark ignition powered cars?
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 31,135
    I think what we are seeing is good news for diesel fans. I think they have gotten their act together on producing ULSD. The closest diesel station to me this morning has ULSD at $2.99 and regular unleaded as $3.39. During the run up of gas last year diesel stayed within a dime of regular. I will continue to track it. When the prices reverse I will buy another diesel vehicle. This is more in line with the price difference in most of the EU. A major factor in them selling over 50% diesel cars there. I think we will see that trend as soon as approval is signed for all 50 states on several German and a couple Japanese diesel vehicles.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,440
    ..."See post 2523"...

    The emphasis is on diesel (but you knew/know that). Your intent is the sound of one hand clapping. One might wish to ignore the fact the passenger vehicle fleet is upwards of 97% gasser for (a) simple but yet at the same time complex reason/s. So if you are ok paying more (46% more) to achieve the same goal, (miles driven), then so am I. :) Harder to do it cheaper (like model for like, or even a quasi; apples to oranges) when there has been literally no choice for a very long time, in the matter. The post mentions at least one advantage to diesel. It is also probably apparent which is more consumptive of resources, which would be another advantage to diesel.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,440
    A post by Larsb,sometime ago might point the way to the shape of things to come in so called super car pantheon.(read: highly consumptive of fuel, high power and high cost) Most of them (gassers) are lucky to get 12-18 mpg on a long down hill with a tail wind. The Corvette Z06 can get up to 25-28 mpg, but that is one of very few that do. Indeed a diesel with a twin turbo that gets 48 mpg on RACE day. Not bad either to get a sub 4 second (or so) 0-60 metric. Up to 70 mpg would certainly get a lot of peoples' attention if produced in the 6000 unit per year on up category.
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Posts: 1,640
    I don't know what is in the snake oil additives but I am sure it is not sulfur.

    On the contrary, when I go to the tractor store to look for fuel additives, I am buying the jugs that add sulfur. And I do not feel bad about it either. The older engines were designed that way. I figure the 3600 trees I farm remove enough "bad" air that someone should actually send me an air pollution credit reimbursement. Hey, if you are paying to pollute, someone should get paid to clean up also :)

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 31,135
    I believe the red dye diesel you can buy cheaper for your tractors is still the old higher sulfur formula.
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Posts: 1,640
    nope, they are all the same. They simply add the dye in as they fill the truck. Otherwise, they can deliver clear diesel at red diesel tax free prices if you sign your life away :-).

    I can request and pay for additional additives, but nothing that will make it out of spec. I prefer to add my own.

Sign In or Register to comment.