![](http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:R8sR7daexSBGmM:www.ted-kyte.com/3D/Pictures/Spark%2520Plug.jpg";)
Rest In Peace, old friend, your work is finished.....If you want ON or OFF the DIESEL ”KnOcK” LIST just FReepmail me.....
This is a fairly HIGH VOLUME ping list on some days.....
Posted on 12/30/2007 8:51:21 AM PST by saganite
Merging with northbound traffic on Interstate 75 just outside Auburn Hills, Mich., I punch the accelerator, quickly swing left into the passing lane and pull forcefully ahead of the cars around me. In any other ride, on any other gray morning, it’d be just another Interstate moment. But this rush hour, I’m behind the wheel of a preproduction 2009 Volkswagen Jetta, which is powered by a 2.0-liter turbo-charged, direct-injected diesel engine that, even as I leave the speed limit in tatters, is averaging nearly 50 mpg. Equally important, what’s coming out of the tailpipe is no dirtier than the emissions from the 35-mpg econoboxes I can now see in my rearview mirror. Speed, fuel efficiency and minimal emissions? These aren’t characteristics usually associated with diesel-powered vehicles. But they will be.
Most Americans have a bad impression of diesel cars. We think of them as loud, hard to start and foul-smelling. We sneer at them for lacking the get-up-and-go of their gasoline-powered cousins. And we dislike them for their perceived environmental sins, chiefly the polluting brew of sulfur and nitrogen compounds that they emit into the atmosphere. All those complaints were fair a generation ago, when the twin energy crises of the 1970s propelled diesels into national popularity and kept them there for a decade. Back then, many drivers ignored diesel’s faults, or were unaware of them, because diesel cars ran 30 percent farther on a gallon of fuel than similar gasoline-powered cars. It felt savvy to buy a diesel, even daring. Then fuel prices dropped in the mid-1980s, and drivers abandoned their clattering, odoriferous fuel sippers. They went back to gasoline.
Today, diesel powertrains are on the map again, for both car manufacturers and efficiency-minded drivers. The technology could be here to stay, even if fuel prices (improbably) decline. .
(Excerpt) Read more at popularmechanics.com ...
As I said, all the three shaft sizes have bearings at 5’ intervals. If you try to use a 1” shaft on a 200HP motor with a pump at 300’, you’re going to break the shaft pretty quickly due to torsion work hardening.
As you say, if the bearings become run out and the shaft, even of proper diameter, has run out, then even a shaft of the correct size will fail. I’ve had exactly that sort of failure in a 1.25” shaft under a 125HP motor. It’s a pain in the chops, to be sure.
Sorry for the dupe: in AC motors, it isn’t easy to increase the RPM. The RPM is pretty much set by the line frequency and the number of winding poles. For most all irrigation motors, your max RPM is 1800RPM no-load, 1745RPM (or thereabouts) under full load (accounting for what is called “slip”). You can use variable frequency drives to change the RPM, but it is pretty rare to over-speed these motors, because the turbine pumps are designed for the full-load RPM of the typical three phase induction motor at 60Hz.
Tell that to NVdave. He thinks the only motors worth building are straight sixes or v12s.
But now that you mention it, I have seen alot of large industral generators and pumps with v10 motors. And when I industrial I don’t mean a farmer’s irrigation pump(like NVdave talks about). I mean pumping stations for the gas company or electrical generation for small towns.
the motor are not comeing here ,because they are going to china they are cheap fuel friendly and not EPA
VW, Mercedes and others did just that until the 2005 model year (I think). They built what were called “45 state” diesel engines. None of them did it after 2005; I think some new regulatory kink prevented them from continuing this practice.
I fully agree — the clowns in California should be forced to suffer the ultimate consequences of their own regs. I’d like to see this happen not only with diesel engines, but also with electrical power produced from coal.
Even the really high-mileage diesel cars are a slow sell to the US auto public, because the US auto public is too slow to realize that today’s diesels have NOTHING in common with those festerous GM diesels produced in the late 70s — the converted 350 V-8’s that sucked the chrome off a bumper hitch. The US auto buying public looks back at the VW diesels and GM diesels of that era and remembers:
1. They were slow. Man, were they slow. This was because they often didn’t have turbos.
2. They smoked, because they didn’t have today’s computer control of the fuel rack to prevent over-fueling at low RPM’s and they didn’t have turbos. Today’s diesels really benefit from computer control of the fuel system, wastegate (or variable geometry) on the turbo.
3. Today’s autos and pickups finally have enough gears in the transmissions to start keeping the diesel engine in its optimum power/torque band. This really helps put the acceleration back into these cars.
If I were marketing diesel cars to today’s auto-buying public, I’d just rip the diesel badge off the car/pickup/whatever, put the potential customer into the vehicle without telling the buyer what sort of engine/fuel it is, and take them out for a test drive. While on the test drive, I’d tell them what sort of mileage the vehicle gets. Just keep the word “diesel” out of it until the customer has actually experienced what today’s diesels will do.
One of the thing about the current diesel emission standards that is hampering the fuel efficiency of diesels is that to achieve the NOx standards, injection timings are being retarded. The NOx goes down, but the fuel efficiency goes down as well.
Since we’re talking about cars (read the original article), I’m talking about engines that would go into cars.
But OK, if you wish to have me concede the point, by all means, stuff a big inline Fairbanks-Morse vertically opposed engine into a car. More power to you.
I fuel my 7.3L Ford Powerstroke at a cardlock where the big rigs fuel and pay about 10 to 15% less than I would at regular station. I pay less for diesel than others pay for gasoline. And if I was using a gas engine instead of diesel I would be filling up 5 times to every time I fill this diesel tank. You figure how much I save? It is plenty!
Got under 125,000 miles and it still runs like a well oiled top.
Rest In Peace, old friend, your work is finished.....If you want ON or OFF the DIESEL ”KnOcK” LIST just FReepmail me.....
This is a fairly HIGH VOLUME ping list on some days.....
The problem with diesels is, as always, government.
Diesel engines today are wonderful machines with great efficiency and long, long life. They are quiet and do not emit the smoke and soot reminiscent of diesels of yore.
Unfortunately, emissions regulations have cut into that efficiency while increasing the costs of the engines.
Also, diesel is taxed in many states higher than gasoline (those eeevil tractor trailers destroy our roads!) so the cost per gallon is higher, negating the fuel efficiency gains.
With regard to biodiesel, states are cracking down on users who cannot prove they paid taxes on the fuel they make themselves! There have been numerous stories here on FR with regard to this, making biodiesel nearly as expensive as refined diesel.
Diesel would be a wonderful alternative if gov’t would just get out of the way.
Yes, the anti-gel is probably overkill, but the thought of waxing a filter when it is -10F is kind of intimidating. I just put in a couple of ounces. I also run 2 stroke oil at a ratio of 1 ounce to the gallon for added lubricity. I have one of the early 24v motors with the temperamental injection pump.
But we just relifed a wheel loader at a local mill that had 30,000 hours on a tier 2 8.1L engine (common rail EFI) and it was still running smooth and quiet, but with a lot of smoke.
So it seems the 466 and it’s successors don’t do as well in the shorter power cycles of the hydraulic excavators as they do at pulling a load on wheels.
Now the tier 3 machines are going into the field and they are a complete redesign 9.0L engine with common rail EFI, electronic variable geometry turbo, EGR, electronic maintenance of coolant, charge air, and fuel temperatures with coolers for each and hydraulic variable speed reversing fan. So a lot of engineering has gone into feeding these engines exactly what they need to meet emission requirements. They have no CAT or scrubbers, so far. They start cold whisper quiet with no visible smoke and run smooth and quiet all day. Time will tell on their longevity I guess. The Isuzu powered Hitachi models that sell alongside the Deere machines have always gone over 20,000 hours easily, but the replacement cost for the Isuzu is twice that of the Deere.
While that may be so, diesel has significantly higher energy content per unit volume than gasoline.
You have an LED lighting stock play?
I got a 2002 Jetta. And it gets 50+ MPG and is quiet, clean and in the winter I can run a Kerosene blend with it for easy starts even in COLD IOWA!
Your logic is unassailable - gelling a filter is a hard way to spend your time walking.
If it should ever happen to you, pick up a product called “911” — it is a very rapid anti-gel additive.
If you can get to your fuel filter when (if) you’re ever gelled up - add the anti-gel directly there. The fuel isn’t really “gelling” so much as it is “clouding” — the paraffin crystals are starting to precipitate out of the fuel and clog your fuel filter. If you add anti-gel directly to your filter, or you can warm the filter housing, you can often clear the “gelling” problem quickly.
This is why Ford puts the fuel filter into the valley between the two cylinder banks on their V-8’s: heat the filter.
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.