Posted on 10/31/2006 5:16:24 AM PST by Red Badger
Unit injector, common rail, or rotary?
A more appropriate title for the article might be "Decade of the Diesel". Definitely a good time to be in diesel if one has done their homework...
Of course, there's another nasty little truth here that's being ignored - much like hybrids, there's an often fairly hefty price premium to paid up front for a diesel engine, particularly modern TDI-type engines. These engines are very efficient and durable, but they cost significantly more to make than gasoline engines of comparable performance. If you keep cars a really long time, or really pile the miles on, this may pay for itself. However, with diesel fuel typically costing more per gallon than gasoline these days, the cost recovery is going to be slow.
I also wonder whether developments in direct-injection, stratified charge gasoline engines may overtake the diesel. Although still immature, in theory these engines could have all the benefits of diesel engines (high compression ratios, and thus torque, ability to run at very high A/F ratios, etc) and none of the shortcomings, in particular the particulate issue.
Make no mistake, there is still considerable room for improvement in internal combustion engine, the alternatives to which (mostly electric with power from fuel cells or batteries) still have a long way to go to compete on range, performance, and cost effectiveness. Sure, they could build an electric car today with a decent range and good performance. But the battery pack would cost as much as several (like 5 to 10) cars.
I meant the pump at the convenience store....
Passenger diesels in Europe outnumber passenger diesels in the U.S. by at least 10:1 because the emissions rules are more lax there.
Yeah, that's why Honda, Toyota and Nissan have been pouring billions of yen into diesel research. GM and FORD are really smart to keep their money in gasoline power....../(s)
Seems to me that diesel was touted as the fuel of the future quite a few years ago. Of course, then, diesel fuel was half the price of premium.
Seem strange to replay this same old tune, when diesel (here in Kalifornia) is the same price as premium.
So, let me check your math here...it's not economical to pay roughly 5-10% more for fuel, when you get 30-40% better fuel economy. Is that right?
I keep seeing this but, I have yet to see it explained. Why do stricter federal regulations lead to higher availability of diesels? Seems like the new regs would make the cars and the fuel more expensive. Is it simply that the mfrs. believe the new regs will make diesel cars more acceptable to consumers?
Same tune with a new band. Diesel technology has come a long way since then. GM's sorry effort at shoehorning a commercial diesel into a passenger car in the 80's was doomed before it started. Dirty fuel, lack of convenient supply and lack of engineering refinements, left a bad taste in the mouth of consumers. EPA and other sources were also at fault, but to a lesser extent. Now that "GW" is the new buzzword, diesel looks much better, both technologically and from a consumer "green" standpoint. Less NO, CO, and CO2 from diesel, more mileage, longer wear, bio-recylcable sources, fewer moving parts, and on and on. Diesel has been cleaned up, brushed off and shined for a new generation of drivers. My daughter, now 20, has no idea of the "old" problems with diesel. She sees only a good new "environmentally friendlier" technology to come.........
GM and Ford offer diesel TRUCKS which don't have to meet the same emissions requirements of the cars.
Mercedes has a new urea injection system to lower emissions, and will equip some Jeep and Mercedes products with them in 2007-8. Volkswagon will also offer a new diesel Tourage in 2008, but pulled the 2007 model due to emissions problems.
And GM is investing in new truck diesel technology, but not passenger cars.
whether they "believe" it or not, is irrelevant. What is "driving" it, ironically, is the worldwide belief in "Global Warming" and reduction of greenhouse gasses. While not perfect, diesel does do just that. Better mileage and less pollution at the same time, with less dollars/euros spent on research for a cleaner "gasoline" burner.............Japanese auto mfrs are already to flood our market with diesels, and once again, GM/FORD will be caught flatfooted...........
I have a hard time explaining that to my wife, too........
I can see GM doing the same thing it did in the 80's all over again. Taking a truck/commercial engine and trying to retrofit it into a passenger car.......
well if its a choice between supporting a farmer or some nut job from the middle east...call me crazy but im picking the farmer...
30 API gravity + .50 sulfur should equal 138,000. Lower sulfur should actually be a bit higher. If the BTUs are lower, its because the product is lighter...up to 35 or 38 Gravity.
It brings US diesel fuel specifications in line with Europe, notably sulphur content. The diesels imported before the change were actually an earlier generation of motor.
Anyone know what the avg. cetane rating appears to be in the new low-sulpher diesel?
Min US DOT is 40 cetane.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.