Eco Diesel failure

[blingo]

Yes, Hilux, Hiace, Prado,.. this was essentially just a passenger car engine, successor to 1KZ-T IDI, not to the "B" engines of more serious Landcruisers (with 4-cylinders). More serious drama queens would have just ordered more seriously I guess, as for official purposes and rougher uses, fuels, bad habits etc. there often are exceptions from common new car requirements.
However, maybe the current successor will leave this usually mediocre terrain of Mercedes & Co. Or Range Rovers with VM-diesels followed by still barely acceptable BMW-diesels. Europe usually had weak engines in these classes not up to the tasks while japanese heavy duties from Nissan or Toyota got their stout engines for the rest of world and such intermediates in subsequent areas. For building fire engines, recovery vehicles and the like it may have been necessary to look beyond the dealer around the corner to get the real Landcruiser or Patrol, but they were available.

Never looked into the current GD 2.8l so far I've got to admit. And things actually got remixed quite a bit as modern downsizing technologies brought 400-700hp engines to the passenger car markets and drove more mature little diesels into the light duties. Just like the reset needed to end all confusions...

 

[Blagoje]

The newest Ram 1500 may be an exceptional truck but it seems like all I ever hear about it are complaints to do with the engines issues no matter what engine.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by blingo
Yes, Hilux, Hiace, Prado,.. this was essentially just a passenger car engine, successor to 1KZ-T IDI, not to the "B" engines of more serious Landcruisers (with 4-cylinders). More serious drama queens would have just ordered more seriously I guess, as for official purposes and rougher uses, fuels, bad habits etc. there often are exceptions from common new car requirements.
However, maybe the current successor will leave this usually mediocre terrain of Mercedes & Co. Or Range Rovers with VM-diesels followed by still barely acceptable BMW-diesels. Europe usually had weak engines in these classes not up to the tasks while japanese heavy duties from Nissan or Toyota got their stout engines for the rest of world and such intermediates in subsequent areas. For building fire engines, recovery vehicles and the like it may have been necessary to look beyond the dealer around the corner to get the real Landcruiser or Patrol, but they were available.

Never looked into the current GD 2.8l so far I've got to admit. And things actually got remixed quite a bit as modern downsizing technologies brought 400-700hp engines to the passenger car markets and drove more mature little diesels into the light duties. Just like the reset needed to end all confusions...

Problem is complexity. I have a lot of experience with Land Cruisers that were part of the fleet in OSCE and NATO as well as Patrol's. Those that you talk about are old school engines, old technology etc.
Toyota&Co is not that good in current environment, basically since common-rail started to get footing in 1998. Other markets do not have emission regulations as tough as EU or US, or Japan. So offering less complex engines is possible.

 

[blingo]

Toyota ain't exactly the name to have you fear more complex products in general. Really to be feared in general with newer technology in upstate regions is fuel (qualities, water content and other contamination, kerosene additions etc.) High pressure common rail systems cannot be forgiving like older systems.

But the main problem of european vehicles of these classes was even downtown just the use of passenger vehicles' diesel engines. Sometimes because of a 2.5l limitation in national taxations e.g. That's also how the Prados happened and that's how VM Motori got their engines in a few Landcruisers, Range Rovers, Jeeps... Another were corporate ties, that's how Range Rover later tried to get along with the tiny BMW diesel. Another one the corporate philosophy. Mercedes deliberately had people spending passenger vehicle engines and transmissions in their G-wagon for ages. Often enough they may have thought that the next generation would do better and often enough it got even worse, down to the infamous 4.0 cdi...
Revvier layouts had people rev the engines all the time in the heavier cars and even worse in SUVs, off road vehicles and the like. That's how the little VM and BMW and Mercedes got consumed while the 12H-T or 13B-T, 1HD or 1FZ... with double and triple the mileage often including much towing just got sold and went on with a new owner. Not all is only stupid cult out there. There is a difference towing with an anemic VM, BMW or Mercedes - for transmissions, clutches and engines themselves. The more serious Landcruiser engines also were not exclusive to Landcruisers, but they were shared with even heavier vehicles and machines or adapted by Yanmar for marine use for example.

Now the thread initially was about some Dodges. So back on the track that's so off the track from the beginning for basically a little on highway passenger car engine: Of course things can be blended. That's how GM for its 2500HD and up with Isuzu got to the Duramax in the end. By blending an old passenger vehicle number (V8) and some medium duty tech. On a clean sheet and a scrubbed mind letting go old inadequacies stemming from underrating things. How much blending had been done for these Dodges? With these Eco-Diesels they never had serious Ivecos in them, right?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted by 2015_PSD
Originally Posted by CT8
WARRANTY? The Eco Diesels seem to be trouble some engines per internet blather.

Agreed; I became engaged in a heated discussion in one of the Jeep forums about the issues with modern diesels and was more or less told I did not know what I was talking about. Said that Overkill's experience with constant regens was impossible and DPF/SCR/DEF was not as problematic as I suggested.

I laughed and said I hope you have a great service life with no issues, but I would not hold my breath on it, it is after all, a Fiat diesel.

It's not Fiat, it's all of them. They're all bad, no exceptions. A tractor at work burned 20+ gallons of fuel yesterday doing a 10-hour regen...the CEL and "regen needed" lights are still on, it's going to Ryder today. We have another with a CEL...nobody knows why, nobody (including Cummins) can fix it. So they just keep resetting it every couple months.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
It's a 183 cubic inch diesel with aluminum heads I believe and a cast iron block? It puts out a lot of torque and it's too much stress for that IMO. What other truck duty diesel has aluminum heads? There is too much heat generated in the combustion chambers and too much power for the small structure, or they wouldn't be failing. Nothing is like all cast iron for stability and strength.

The Duramax has aluminum heads.


Pretty sure that VW has used aluminum heads on their diesels since the 80s.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
It's a 183 cubic inch diesel with aluminum heads I believe and a cast iron block? It puts out a lot of torque and it's too much stress for that IMO. What other truck duty diesel has aluminum heads? There is too much heat generated in the combustion chambers and too much power for the small structure, or they wouldn't be failing. Nothing is like all cast iron for stability and strength.

The Duramax has aluminum heads.


Pretty sure that VW has used aluminum heads on their diesels since the 80s.


Yeah, he stated truck-duty diesel however, so the Duramax immediately came to mind.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by 2015_PSD
Originally Posted by ragtoplvr
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
Garbage engine, trade it in for a ford F series diesel. At least Ford can make diesel engines. And use heavy duty engine oil next time.
After the 6.0 disaster and the mess with later diesels the 6.7 looks pretty good, until you have to pay for fixes. Ford is only up to average on a low scale.
The Ford diesel platform still has issues:

-- The Bosch HPFP pumps have failed due to ULSD fuel (not unique to Ford, Bosch is the problem here).
-- The DPF/SCR/DEF systems have had lots of issues from early plugging of the DPF, to the myriad of SCR sensors that have failed, to the issues with the DEF system often requiring a complete replacement.
-- The system can be caught in a "continuous regen" if only driving in stop and go traffic sending fuel mileage into the toilet.
-- The EGR coolers typically plug or leak and this is exacerbated by stop and go driving.
-- The fuel filter system (at least until 2017 when it was redesigned) has a horrible design such that the WIF sensor sits about 1.25" above the bottom of the filter housing and water is pulled into the system long before it goes off (and damage is not covered by the warranty).

While OTR and other heavy duty machinery may keep diesels alive, for passenger cars and light trucks, I opine they will go the way of the dodo much sooner than later.



I am a Bosch authorized common rail technician

The problem with the CP4 exists for sure, but about a decade ago Bosch took four different CP4 designs to four different OE manufacturers for approval, and they all chose the cheapest one.

You are 100% correct in that modern diesels need to be out in the open. City driving is the worst.


Local trash company seems to have taken drastic action: their latest truck is an F-750 with gas power.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted by Jarlaxle

Local trash company seems to have taken drastic action: their latest truck is an F-750 with gas power.

Down in SoCal and somewhat in NorCal, the trash companies(more so Waste Management and Recology) have been using CNG. Almost all buses in SoCal are natural gas and now I'm seeing xNG day cabs being used by the grocery chains and USPS contractors.

The engines in those are based off a Cummins diesel but with spark plugs and port fuel injection like a gasser.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted by nthach
Originally Posted by Jarlaxle

Local trash company seems to have taken drastic action: their latest truck is an F-750 with gas power.

Down in SoCal and somewhat in NorCal, the trash companies(more so Waste Management and Recology) have been using CNG. Almost all buses in SoCal are natural gas and now I'm seeing xNG day cabs being used by the grocery chains and USPS contractors.

The engines in those are based off a Cummins diesel but with spark plugs and port fuel injection like a gasser.

Question--does the state or local cities give incentives for CNG? Or are these motors able to be lower cost/mile and lower TCO than diesel all on their own?

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted by supton

Question--does the state or local cities give incentives for CNG? Or are these motors able to be lower cost/mile and lower TCO than diesel all on their own?

From what I see, it's PR + local incentives/law(especially in SoCal). But since xNG engines don't need DPF+SCR, not having to buy DEF or pay for DPF/SCR cleaning with the mostly urban duty cycle of a bus or trash hauler is a plus but xNG fueling infrastructure is not cheap. My city was using Civic CNGs for parking enforcement but they switched over to the Prius C. The Civics got transferred to parks & rec - and those have to fuel at the nearby port at a Clean Energy facility.

Buses in NorCal are still "clean diesel" or hybrid but I've seen BEV and FCEV buses on the road lately.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The problem with those...they cannot go in many places (no tunnels, offhand), range is usually quite low, and you need a dedicated and very expensive fueling station for them.

 

[nthach]

And those fuel tanks are bulky - the ones for the CNG Civic eat into the cargo space.

San Francisco was looking into CNG buses as a replacement for diesel buses - they found they broke down too much, didn't have the torque to deal with the hills. Since there are tunnels and covered parking at some yards, they can't park or even work on the CNG buses safely.

 

[Jarlaxle]

My company considered CNG tractors, but the upgrades to add a fueling station to our terminal would run six figures.

 

[MattPersman]

I have one in the shop with a failed engine, was on back order but came in about a week (yesterday)

 

[MattPersman]

In with the new

 

[nthach]

That’s cool Mopar can be done cab-off like a Ford.

how much was the long block on the work order and the book time?

 

[MattPersman]

The complete engine, they come complete now again (probably too many failures with long block replacements ) is right around 9 grand for the engine.

Book time warranty was like 12 hours

 

[CarbonSteel]

Agreed; I became engaged in a heated discussion in one of the Jeep forums about the issues with modern diesels and and was more or less told I did not know what I was talking about. Said that Overkill's experience with constant regens was impossible and DPF/SCR/DEF was not as problematic as I suggested.

I laughed and said I hope you have a great service life with no issues, but I would not hold my breath on it, it is after all, a Fiat diesel.

It's not Fiat, it's all of them. They're all bad, no exceptions. A tractor at work burned 20+ gallons of fuel yesterday doing a 10-hour regen...the CEL and "regen needed" lights are still on, it's going to Ryder today. We have another with a CEL...nobody knows why, nobody (including Cummins) can fix it. So they just keep resetting it every couple months

No argument there; note the text in bold. They are only made for the open road--an owner will have far less than an optimal experience with stop and go city driving. The maintenance and failure rate for the emissions/auxiliary systems is costly, unpredictable, and is becoming a joke.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted by CarbonSteel
Originally Posted by ragtoplvr
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
Garbage engine, trade it in for a ford F series diesel. At least Ford can make diesel engines. And use heavy duty engine oil next time.
After the 6.0 disaster and the mess with later diesels the 6.7 looks pretty good, until you have to pay for fixes. Ford is only up to average on a low scale.
The Ford diesel platform still has issues:

-- The Bosch HPFP pumps have failed due to ULSD fuel (not unique to Ford, Bosch is the problem here).
-- The DPF/SCR/DEF systems have had lots of issues from early plugging of the DPF, to the myriad of SCR sensors that have failed, to the issues with the DEF system often requiring a complete replacement.
-- The system can be caught in a "continuous regen" if only driving in stop and go traffic sending fuel mileage into the toilet.
-- The EGR coolers typically plug or leak and this is exacerbated by stop and go driving.
-- The fuel filter system (at least until 2017 when it was redesigned) has a horrible design such that the WIF sensor sits about 1.25" above the bottom of the filter housing and water is pulled into the system long before it goes off (and damage is not covered by the warranty).

While OTR and other heavy duty machinery may keep diesels alive, for passenger cars and light trucks, I opine they will go the way of the dodo much sooner than later.



I am a Bosch authorized common rail technician

The problem with the CP4 exists for sure, but about a decade ago Bosch took four different CP4 designs to four different OE manufacturers for approval, and they all chose the cheapest one.

You are 100% correct in that modern diesels need to be out in the open. City driving is the worst.

I have no doubt the OEMs chose the cheapest route--they almost always do and it typically bites them in the posterior at a later date at a much higher cost than if they had chosen a better solution. Ford typically defaulted to "the owner caused the problem by not performing proper maintenance or that water was in the fuel". Never mind that in the 2011-2016 6.7L engines, Ford had one of the most pathetic designs I have ever seen for a water in fuel (WIF) sensor. It was positioned about 1" from the bottom of the main fuel filter bowl which means that water would be pulled into the system long before the WIF light indicated there is water in the fuel. I do not miss mine and will never own another.