First Lite-Duty diesel

[msparks]

Let take a poll to see who think the first manufacture to put a lite-duty diesel pickup truck.

Ford was supposed to have out a V-6 diesel (baby-powerstroke) but the contract with Navistar got cancelled.

I would jump on a new one in a heart beat. Say one that has decent power (not the new Hemi/lighenning/SS versions) but one that can tow good but gets awesome fuel economy.

I'm thinking my vote will be with a Japanese manufacture (Maybe the titan?)

 

[XS650]

They've had them in other countries for years, although maybe not the power levels you want.

What's available in Oz?

 

[FL-400S]

Id jump all over a diesel electric hybrid truck that got 30 mpg. The combo would produce a ton of torque, which is what you want in a truck anyway. I think Toyota could put out a Hino diesel Tacoma or Tundra today if they wanted to. They already have the parts in Oz and elsewhere. I dont need a 600 ftlb Cummins, but a 200 hp 400 ftlb 4 cyl diesel would be fine with me.

 

[Shannow]

quote:

---

Originally posted by XS650:
What's available in Oz?

---

Toyota Hilux 3.0L TDi

Toyota Land Cruiser

Mazda Bravo 3.0LTDi

Ford Courier

Holden Rodeo

Nissan Patrol

and what I own Nissan Navara 3.0TD (110kW that can be run up to 126 with a pigyback computer)

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by FL-400S:
Id jump all over a diesel electric hybrid truck that got 30 mpg.

---

I don't think you would need a hybrid to get 30mpg. Heck some of the F250's and Cummins 3/4 tons will get 22 or so on the highway. An F150 should be able to get pretty close to 30. And a smaller pickup like a ranger would probably get over 40 mpg (unloaded on the highway)

******* dealers only sell us what they think we "need"

 

[msparks]

BTW,

I noticed an ad in the paper today for the new Diesel Jeep liberty. I think they must now have one in stock. I"m going to go test drive it sometime next week.

 

[cryptokid]

volkswagen made in the early 70's to late 80's a pickup truck that had a diesel. it got 55 miles per gallon. only had about 65hp and 90ftlb of torque though, which sucks but it was kind of a small truck so its low power wasnt all that bad. it was around the size of a ranger.

my dad has one of these trucks and he has swapped in a modern jetta turbo diesel. he now enjoys more torque than the wheels have traction.
his truck is faster than a modern turbo diesel jetta and he can haul 600lbs of crap in the bed wqith no sweat.

 

[medic]

Why the limited selection of diesels in this country? They seem so much more economical than the gas engines that we are used to, and the alternative fuel options are so much greater.

I had always assumed that the internal combustion engine, as we know it, would see it's death by 2010, but I'm really starting to wonder if I was right.

BTW, as I undertsand it, the reason Ford scrapped the diesel F150 plan was because of tightening emmisions standards for diesels and the engine would need to be redesigned within 5 years to meet these standards.

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by medic:
Why the limited selection of diesels in this country?

---

Several reasons. Once is the stigma from the 70's diesel that were slow, stinky and sooty.

The other is emissions. The engine makers won't make(or send over) a diesel because the fuel over here is crap. The fuel is crap because only large trucks use diesel over here and they won't make it better.

By 2007 that should all change with the lower Sulpher standards which will help. I don't know if they plan to bring the Cetane levels up or not. I hope they do!!

Europe has been enjoying a mass amount of diesels for at least 10 years. We are about 10 years behind as far as that goes (same with Cell phones, theirs are better than ours)

 

[moribundman]

quote:

---

Europe has been enjoying a mass amount of diesels for at least 10 years.

---

Make that 30 years.


One thing I'd like to know is why the US diesel fuel is problematic for small diesel engines, while it seems to be totally unproblematic in the case of large truck diesels.

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by moribundman:

One thing I'd like to know is why the US diesel fuel is problematic for small diesel engines, while it seems to be totally unproblematic in the case of large truck diesels.

---

#1 is becuase that most of the small diesels (VW TDI) already has some of the emissions equipment on it. The EGR is what is giving folks the problems. Also the cars are tuned for 50 cetane, therefore with the crappy 40-43 in the US the timing is even further retarded resulting in poorer fuel economy, less power and an inefficient burn.

Bring the fuel up to 50 remove some of the nasties and these cars will perform better. This will encourage more folks to buy them!

Most of the large diesels are using older technology that doesn't require as good of fuel. Though if you put better fuel in one of those as well, watch the fuel economy improve.

Have someone put some Centane boost in a big rig!!! I've seen it

 

[k1xv]

Way back when (1983) I bought a Mitsubishi 2.3 liter turbodiesel pickup truck. It got around 28 mpg. The main problem was that the 5 speed gearbox seemed a little overwhelmed in 5th gear by the available torque.

I think the same truck was available then as a Dodge D50.

I think it was only available for two or three years.

All kinds of diesels are available in Europe and the middle East, and probably elsewhere too. On my last business trip to Israel, I was really attracted to a Toyota Land Cruiser with a turbodiesel.

 

[moribundman]

msparks, thanks for your reply. I find it kind of incomprehensible that there has never been a push to make large diesel engines run cleaner and more efficient in this country. It's high time...

 

[kenw]

Several reasons. Once is the stigma from the 70's diesel that were slow, stinky and sooty.


news flash: they still are, even if less so. add noisey and you pretty much sum it up.

if i wanted to drive a piece of farm equipment to work, i would be a farmer.

[ February 15, 2005, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: kenw ]

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
mssparks - you said this;

"Bring the fuel up to 50 remove some of the nasties and these cars will perform better. This will encourage more folks to buy them!"

In Australia the Cetane rating has been at 50 (to AS3570 - D975 2D)for many years. Diesel cars still sell slowly here. Diesel powered utes (small trucks) and 4WD vehicles are very popular! They have been for many years and engine life is often out to 500k kms or more without rebuild

And you said this;

"Most of the large diesels are using older technology that doesn't require as good of fuel. Though if you put better fuel in one of those as well, watch the fuel economy improve."

This is just simply NOT SO!!!

In the mid to late 1980's US heavy diesel engine manufacturers became very fussy about fuel quality and ASTM D975 was often superceded by their own specific fuel needs. The minium Cetane rating was 40 to ASTM D613

This was caused by a number of factors (mainly emissions driven)- one of which was the move to electronically managed engine combustion processes. The first electronically managed diesel engines were 2cycle Detroits (DDEC1)- about 1985
THIS HAPPENED WELL BEFORE THIS PROCESS WAS GENERALLY USED IN CARS!!!
MANY LIGHT DIESEL ENGINE USED IN CARS AT THIS POINT WERE NOT EVEN TURBOCHARGED OR INTERCOOLED - MOST HEAVY DIESEL WERE AND THIS HAD COMMENCED IN THE 1960-1970s

As discussed on another thread here the Euro makers followed one path and the NA and Japanese makers developed their own concepts.
All heavy diesel manufacturers since the late 1970's have embarked on the use of very advanced systems and materials - these include;
a) ceramics,
b) direct injection*
c) electronic engine management*
d) specific application lubricants
e) advanced combustion chamber design
f) fail safe engine protection devices
g) positive driver behaviour management
h) remote control of engine performance
i) satellite engine monitoring
j) anti-tampering engine controls
k) and many more.............

* this has enabled injector life to go well beyond 1m kms without attention. With HP pump mechanical injection systems the injector/pump life to first rebuild was often about one third of this - or less

As another example, the advancements made in diesel engine oil development has "driven" the pace that petrol engine oils have been developed

Since 1987 there has been nine (9) API quality standards for diesels of which seven (7) are still current
In this time there has been six (6) API quality standards for petrol engines. Three (3)of these are current! With petrol oils with dual API quality ratings even the SL still used only CD or CF4 as the secondary diesel rating!

Outside the API's standards there are many more diesel engine oil quality standards that are engine maker (or geography) specific and critical to their well being

Improved fuel economy in heavy diesel engines has been reached via electronics/technologies rather than via fuel quality!

moribundman - diesel engine emissions have been very strictly controlled in NA since the early-mid 1980s and progessively since then
Euro emission mamagement commenced via Sweden and Germany in the 1960s

Most heavy vehicles that emit smoke (except on initial accelleration, then visible smoke is only allowed for 10seconds in OZ)are outside the manufacturer's and the EPA's specifications. this is usually due to poor maintenance/servicing, driver tampering and etc

medic - at a 1975 meeting I had in Germany with a number of DB's Senior Development Engineers they projected at least a 25-30year cycle with the current(then)diesel engine. This was without sophisticated electronics factored in.
Since then this expectation has been at least doubled due to electronic developments and some other issues too
As a matter of interest many old diesel vehicles still run the highways in trucking fleets - some 30+years old or more

Regards
Doug