Scott Brady
Founder
2009 Model year, 2008 release to coincide with wide availability of low sulfur fuel.
Diesel News: POST HERE
- Thread starter Scott Brady
- Start date
ChuckB
Expedition Leader
Jonathan Hanson said:
On my way back to the U.S. we had a 4 day lay-over in Kuwait. I saw the (what I assume to be "new") Hilux. The body style was scarily similar to the 05+ Taco and I believe it had a 2.7L diesel. Can anyone confirm this? I have not searched the net or anything for it. I wish I would have had my camera handy...
Jonathan Hanson
Supporting Sponsor
The current issue of Car and Driver has a test of the BMW 330D diesel available in Europe (0 to 60 in six seconds, 38 mpg!). In a sidebar they summarize why so few diesels are available here. Essentially new car emissions regulations make no distinction between gas and diesel engines. Current diesels could pass particulate emissions with a particulate filter such as is used in Europe, but our high-sulphur diesel fuel quickly clogs the filter. Thus the wait until better fuel is available here.
I refuse to second-guess emissions requirements, which have done incalculable good for the air in our country. But it seems some sort of balancing act between air quality and use of fossil fuels would be a good thing.
I refuse to second-guess emissions requirements, which have done incalculable good for the air in our country. But it seems some sort of balancing act between air quality and use of fossil fuels would be a good thing.
OutbacKamper
Supporting Sponsor
This may be old news, but new to me:
Jeep is dropping the CRD (diesel) option for the Liberty at the end of this model year. The good news is that they will offer a diesel option on the Grand Cherokee, production starts in January.
Scource: World of Wheels, Sept 2006
Jeep is dropping the CRD (diesel) option for the Liberty at the end of this model year. The good news is that they will offer a diesel option on the Grand Cherokee, production starts in January.
Scource: World of Wheels, Sept 2006
Scott Brady
Founder
Worlds Most Powerful Motor
Some facts on the 14 cylinder version:
Total engine weight: 2300 tons (The crankshaft alone weighs 300 tons.)
Length: 89 feet
Height: 44 feet
Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm
Some facts on the 14 cylinder version:
Total engine weight: 2300 tons (The crankshaft alone weighs 300 tons.)
Length: 89 feet
Height: 44 feet
Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm
Robthebrit
Explorer
Scott,
Yikes...I thought that diesel in my truck was big... Here is a link to some info on the same engine..
http://people.bath.ac.uk/ccsshb/12cyl/
Rob
Yikes...I thought that diesel in my truck was big... Here is a link to some info on the same engine..
http://people.bath.ac.uk/ccsshb/12cyl/
Rob
calamaridog
Expedition Leader
expeditionswest said:
I agree.
calamaridog
Expedition Leader
Scenic WonderRunner said:
Mark,
It has been, and continues to be, my experience that I know more about the vehicles I'm shopping for than the person trying to sell it to me. Take that for whatever it is worth. I will be shocked if they introduce a diesel to the Tundra lineup before the 2009 model year.
Scott Brady
Founder
Robthebrit said:
WELCOME TO ExPo!
What an awesome mog (crew cab too) :drool:
Any pictures of the Mog? Maybe a new thread in the HD section if you have time.
calamaridog
Expedition Leader
CA low sulfer now here
Soon we will be seeing more diesel options I think:birthday.sml:
CLEANER DIESEL FUEL QUIETLY ARRIVES
By CHRIS BOWMAN
The Sacramento Bee
SACRAMENTO - California will reach another big milestone on the road to healthier air this week as suppliers of diesel complete a mandated switch to an ''ultra low-sulfur'' blend.
Remarkably, the sweeping changeover in fuel arrives unheralded by the usual angst or trepidation over engine breakdowns, performance drops and price spikes at the pump.
''It's been very quiet, to the point that we had to publicize that it's taking place,'' said Jerry Martin, veteran spokesman for the state Air Resources Board, which adopted the diesel rule.
Smog regulators demonstrated the new fuel in Sacramento last week by holding a bleached-white handkerchief to the exhaust spout of an idling tanker truck. Sure enough, as news cameras zoomed in, the hanky stayed spotless.
Aesthetics aside, the new fuel promises to greatly reduce harmful emissions from trucks and buses, smog officials said.
The cleaner fuel also paves the way for auto manufacturers to introduce a wide variety of diesel-powered passenger vehicles that otherwise could not meet California's toughest-in-the-nation exhaust standards, according to diesel engine manufacturers.
''You can see them all lining up,'' said Michael Coates, spokesman for the Diesel Technology Forum, a nonprofit industry trade group.
Just last Friday General Motors announced plans to roll out a 360-horsepower turbodiesel in a full-size pickup sometime after 2009. BMW, Volkswagen, Daimler-Chrysler and Ford have similar plans in the works, Coates said.
In addition to delivering more punch than gasoline engines at low speeds, the diesel models would rival today's gasoline hybrids on fuel economy, Coates said.
GM promises that its debut engine will use 25 percent less fuel than a comparable gasoline V8.
California's deadline for the switchover to low-sulfur diesel is Friday. A similar federal rule gives diesel suppliers elsewhere in the nation until Oct. 1.
The regulations limits the sulfur content in diesel to 15 parts per million -- a 97 percent reduction from the current 500 ppm standard.
Sulfur, a naturally occurring component of diesel, is not the chemical of health concern. Rather, the sulfur interferes with pollution control equipment on diesel-powered vehicles.
At current levels, the chemical clogs soot filters and disarms catalytic converters, which destroy smog-forming gases in the exhaust.
Diesel engines produce cancer-causing soot and vastly surpass gasoline-fueled models in emissions of nitrogen oxides, compounds that smudge the skies yellowish brown and form ozone -- the ingredient in smog that irritates the eyes and airways, according to the state air board.
''Realistically, we are not going to eliminate diesel engines any time soon, so we have to clean them up as much as we can," the air board's Martin said.
Nationwide, the cleaner fuel is expected to reduce soot and nitrogen oxide emissions by more than 90 percent in the next three years as truck and bus engine manufacturers phase in models with stronger emissions standards.
When fully implemented, in 2010, the new engine standards will prevent an estimate 8,300 soot-related deaths and tens of thousands of smog-related diseases such as bronchitis and asthma, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
In California, the vast majority of service stations already are selling the cleaner diesel, according to the state air board.
''The public really has not noticed any changeover, though it has mostly occurred,'' Martin said.
That was not hardly the case in previous changeovers to cleaner fuel in California.
Motorists complained of engine knocking for years as the octane-enhancing lead was phased out of gasoline in the late 1970s.
The first reformulation of diesel in 1993, which cut sulfur to 500 ppm from 3,000 ppm, created a storm of protests as the changeover boosted the price at truckers' pumps and caused engine breakdowns and fuel leakage in thousands of big rigs, Martin recalled.
The furor also forced the resignation of the much-respected air board chairwoman, Jananne Sharpless, an appointee of then-Gov. Pete Wilson, Martin said.
Then, in the late 1990s, Wilson's successor, Gray Davis, faced political pressure to phase out the gasoline ingredient MTBE, a compound introduced into California's fuel to replace harmful lead as an octane booster.
As refineries increased the amount of MTBE to replace other harmful components, the additive posed a special environmental threat in gasoline leaks and spills. Highly soluble, MTBE moved far faster underground than any other gasoline ingredients and could pass through purification plants. And at low levels it imparted a solvent-like taste to drinking water.
The state no longer allows MTBE in fuel.
Soon we will be seeing more diesel options I think:birthday.sml:
CLEANER DIESEL FUEL QUIETLY ARRIVES
By CHRIS BOWMAN
The Sacramento Bee
SACRAMENTO - California will reach another big milestone on the road to healthier air this week as suppliers of diesel complete a mandated switch to an ''ultra low-sulfur'' blend.
Remarkably, the sweeping changeover in fuel arrives unheralded by the usual angst or trepidation over engine breakdowns, performance drops and price spikes at the pump.
''It's been very quiet, to the point that we had to publicize that it's taking place,'' said Jerry Martin, veteran spokesman for the state Air Resources Board, which adopted the diesel rule.
Smog regulators demonstrated the new fuel in Sacramento last week by holding a bleached-white handkerchief to the exhaust spout of an idling tanker truck. Sure enough, as news cameras zoomed in, the hanky stayed spotless.
Aesthetics aside, the new fuel promises to greatly reduce harmful emissions from trucks and buses, smog officials said.
The cleaner fuel also paves the way for auto manufacturers to introduce a wide variety of diesel-powered passenger vehicles that otherwise could not meet California's toughest-in-the-nation exhaust standards, according to diesel engine manufacturers.
''You can see them all lining up,'' said Michael Coates, spokesman for the Diesel Technology Forum, a nonprofit industry trade group.
Just last Friday General Motors announced plans to roll out a 360-horsepower turbodiesel in a full-size pickup sometime after 2009. BMW, Volkswagen, Daimler-Chrysler and Ford have similar plans in the works, Coates said.
In addition to delivering more punch than gasoline engines at low speeds, the diesel models would rival today's gasoline hybrids on fuel economy, Coates said.
GM promises that its debut engine will use 25 percent less fuel than a comparable gasoline V8.
California's deadline for the switchover to low-sulfur diesel is Friday. A similar federal rule gives diesel suppliers elsewhere in the nation until Oct. 1.
The regulations limits the sulfur content in diesel to 15 parts per million -- a 97 percent reduction from the current 500 ppm standard.
Sulfur, a naturally occurring component of diesel, is not the chemical of health concern. Rather, the sulfur interferes with pollution control equipment on diesel-powered vehicles.
At current levels, the chemical clogs soot filters and disarms catalytic converters, which destroy smog-forming gases in the exhaust.
Diesel engines produce cancer-causing soot and vastly surpass gasoline-fueled models in emissions of nitrogen oxides, compounds that smudge the skies yellowish brown and form ozone -- the ingredient in smog that irritates the eyes and airways, according to the state air board.
''Realistically, we are not going to eliminate diesel engines any time soon, so we have to clean them up as much as we can," the air board's Martin said.
Nationwide, the cleaner fuel is expected to reduce soot and nitrogen oxide emissions by more than 90 percent in the next three years as truck and bus engine manufacturers phase in models with stronger emissions standards.
When fully implemented, in 2010, the new engine standards will prevent an estimate 8,300 soot-related deaths and tens of thousands of smog-related diseases such as bronchitis and asthma, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
In California, the vast majority of service stations already are selling the cleaner diesel, according to the state air board.
''The public really has not noticed any changeover, though it has mostly occurred,'' Martin said.
That was not hardly the case in previous changeovers to cleaner fuel in California.
Motorists complained of engine knocking for years as the octane-enhancing lead was phased out of gasoline in the late 1970s.
The first reformulation of diesel in 1993, which cut sulfur to 500 ppm from 3,000 ppm, created a storm of protests as the changeover boosted the price at truckers' pumps and caused engine breakdowns and fuel leakage in thousands of big rigs, Martin recalled.
The furor also forced the resignation of the much-respected air board chairwoman, Jananne Sharpless, an appointee of then-Gov. Pete Wilson, Martin said.
Then, in the late 1990s, Wilson's successor, Gray Davis, faced political pressure to phase out the gasoline ingredient MTBE, a compound introduced into California's fuel to replace harmful lead as an octane booster.
As refineries increased the amount of MTBE to replace other harmful components, the additive posed a special environmental threat in gasoline leaks and spills. Highly soluble, MTBE moved far faster underground than any other gasoline ingredients and could pass through purification plants. And at low levels it imparted a solvent-like taste to drinking water.
The state no longer allows MTBE in fuel.
new diesels coming in Jan 2007
The feds require manufacturers to meet the new emissions standards in January 2007, so the USA manufacturers are waiting until that time to offer the cleaner burning engines. They will be marketed as 2008 models.
GM (Isuzu) will offer a new 6.6L Duramax V8
Ford (International) will offer a 6.4L Powerstroke V8
Dodge (Cummins) will offer a 6.7L I6
The manufacturers had to increase displacement a bit to help compensate for the marginally lower energy in the low-sulphur diesel fuel. The power ratings for all these engines is 325+ HP and 650+ lb ft torque.
Exactly how much more we'll have to pay for the cleaner diesels is not known. I've seen estimates ranging from $500 to $5000 more than current models. There will be higher maintenance costs, too, depending on the schedule for replacement of the particulate trap. The catalytic converter should be good for 100,000 miles or more.
High fuel prices = decreased sales of SUVs and light pickups. Every USA manufacturer is scrambling to increase fuel economy. This may mean more V6 diesels.
International already builds a 4.0L V6 version of the Powerstroke. It's used in the Ford and International LCF (low cab forward) delivery vans. Instead of using that V6, however, Ford is thinking about importing a variant of a V6 used in the Range Rover. According to Autoweek, this engine will be 4.4L, and may be installed in the F150 and the Explorer.
GM is also exploring the possibility of making a V6 version of the Duramax.
Mercedes will use their 3.2L V6 Blutec engine (200 hp, 370 lb ft) in the E series sedans, manufactured in Germany. This engine will also appear in the GL SUVs (and also ML?) built in Alabama.
I can't tell for sure if the diesel engine in the new Sprinter van and Grand Cherokee will be a different engine, evolved from other Mercedes truck diesels, or just a variant of the Blutec.
Unfortunately, few companies are talking about developing small four cylinder diesels for the North American market. The only exception is VW, which will introduce a new 2.0L 4 cylinder diesel with 140hp and 200 lb ft in 2008.
Chip Haven
The feds require manufacturers to meet the new emissions standards in January 2007, so the USA manufacturers are waiting until that time to offer the cleaner burning engines. They will be marketed as 2008 models.
GM (Isuzu) will offer a new 6.6L Duramax V8
Ford (International) will offer a 6.4L Powerstroke V8
Dodge (Cummins) will offer a 6.7L I6
The manufacturers had to increase displacement a bit to help compensate for the marginally lower energy in the low-sulphur diesel fuel. The power ratings for all these engines is 325+ HP and 650+ lb ft torque.
Exactly how much more we'll have to pay for the cleaner diesels is not known. I've seen estimates ranging from $500 to $5000 more than current models. There will be higher maintenance costs, too, depending on the schedule for replacement of the particulate trap. The catalytic converter should be good for 100,000 miles or more.
High fuel prices = decreased sales of SUVs and light pickups. Every USA manufacturer is scrambling to increase fuel economy. This may mean more V6 diesels.
International already builds a 4.0L V6 version of the Powerstroke. It's used in the Ford and International LCF (low cab forward) delivery vans. Instead of using that V6, however, Ford is thinking about importing a variant of a V6 used in the Range Rover. According to Autoweek, this engine will be 4.4L, and may be installed in the F150 and the Explorer.
GM is also exploring the possibility of making a V6 version of the Duramax.
Mercedes will use their 3.2L V6 Blutec engine (200 hp, 370 lb ft) in the E series sedans, manufactured in Germany. This engine will also appear in the GL SUVs (and also ML?) built in Alabama.
I can't tell for sure if the diesel engine in the new Sprinter van and Grand Cherokee will be a different engine, evolved from other Mercedes truck diesels, or just a variant of the Blutec.
Unfortunately, few companies are talking about developing small four cylinder diesels for the North American market. The only exception is VW, which will introduce a new 2.0L 4 cylinder diesel with 140hp and 200 lb ft in 2008.
Chip Haven
10 minutes
after I posted my message I read that GM is showing journalists a Tahoe with a smaller displacement V8 diesel -- "somewhere between 3.0L and 6.0L." So it looks like they won't offer a V6 diesel in a passenger vehicle or light truck.
A diesel V8 is more complicated and expensive than a V6, but I guess people want the V8.
So much of light duty diesel sales is marketing baloney that strokes the male ego (or other parts of the male anatomy). I see dozens of Powerstroke and Cummins powered pickups driving around every day with one occupant and nothing in the bed. The medium trucks doing real work are the cab-forward 4 and 6 cylinder Isuzu and Mitsubishi diesels.
Chip Haven
after I posted my message I read that GM is showing journalists a Tahoe with a smaller displacement V8 diesel -- "somewhere between 3.0L and 6.0L." So it looks like they won't offer a V6 diesel in a passenger vehicle or light truck.
A diesel V8 is more complicated and expensive than a V6, but I guess people want the V8.
So much of light duty diesel sales is marketing baloney that strokes the male ego (or other parts of the male anatomy). I see dozens of Powerstroke and Cummins powered pickups driving around every day with one occupant and nothing in the bed. The medium trucks doing real work are the cab-forward 4 and 6 cylinder Isuzu and Mitsubishi diesels.
Chip Haven
goodtimes
Expedition Poseur
haven said:
There is a poor perception of 6 cylinders in trucks. People think they need a v-8. Never mind that argueably the best diesel engine ever used in a light truck is an inline 6. From the factory they (the B series Cummins) are upwards of 350hp & 650ft/lbs of torque, with 20 +/- mpg in a 7000+ pound truck. Who needs a v8 when you can get the same performance from a I-6, plus have plenty of room under the hood for "fun stuff" (like twin turbo's)?
And to stay on topic....some interesting stuff here:
http://www.dieselforecast.com/
EPA looking to approve urea injection
Jokes about urea injection aside...
Autoweek is reporting that the EPA is working with auto manufacturers to approve a version of urea injection to control oxides of nitrogen in diesel exhaust. The reason is that a urea injection system costs about $500 less than a system based solely on catalytic converters. The Autoweek article estimates the cost of a catalyst-only system to be $1,400.
Here's the link to the Autoweek article
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060829/FREE/60828027/1041
I found another article that describes the components in a diesel emissions system. They are:
-- diesel oxydation catalyst
-- NOx adsorber catalyst
-- particulate filter
-- selective reduction catalyst
The urea injection system works like this
--diesel oxydation catalyst
--particulate filter
--urea injection
--selective reduction catalyst
By reducing the number of catalytic converters, the urea injection system saves the manufacturer money, but adds inconveniece to the vehicle owner. The urea system has to be refilled periodically.
Now let's hear the jokes about how to refill the urea system...
Chip Haven
Jokes about urea injection aside...
Autoweek is reporting that the EPA is working with auto manufacturers to approve a version of urea injection to control oxides of nitrogen in diesel exhaust. The reason is that a urea injection system costs about $500 less than a system based solely on catalytic converters. The Autoweek article estimates the cost of a catalyst-only system to be $1,400.
Here's the link to the Autoweek article
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060829/FREE/60828027/1041
I found another article that describes the components in a diesel emissions system. They are:
-- diesel oxydation catalyst
-- NOx adsorber catalyst
-- particulate filter
-- selective reduction catalyst
The urea injection system works like this
--diesel oxydation catalyst
--particulate filter
--urea injection
--selective reduction catalyst
By reducing the number of catalytic converters, the urea injection system saves the manufacturer money, but adds inconveniece to the vehicle owner. The urea system has to be refilled periodically.
Now let's hear the jokes about how to refill the urea system...
Chip Haven