Diesel engines why not more available in smaller vehicles ?

[Lessmore]

Diesel engines are popular in domestic 3/4 and 1 ton pick up trucks. They are becoming popular in North America and are offered in more lighter duty pickup trucks than before ...the Ram 1500, Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon, 2019 Ford F 150....and the 2019 Chevy/GMC 1500 series pickup trucks.

Mileage improvement, towing etc. are some of the benefits.

In Europe a good chunk of the sedans, SUV's/CUV's are offered with optional diesel engines and consumers buy them in significant numbers.

Why are diesel engines not optionally available in the bulk of sedans/SUV's/CUV's sold in North America ? I would think there would be a ready market for these diesel powered vehicles here.

[Bedlam]

In Europe, getting away from population density is not really possible. They have limited urban sprawl with restrictions to avoid using up all their available farm land, so most people have to be city dwellers or farmers.

Much has been written about Europe's pollution and the damage it does to peoples' health and even to historic monuments. Although some of the concerns are due to vehicles, most had to do with dirty industries and power generation from facilities that use outdated equipment. As one segment gets cleaned up focus is now on another, but there are diminishing returns on expenditures as the standards continue to tighten.

[brulaz]

ShinerBock wrote:

...
Here is the issue with that. They are replacing those diesels with engines that actually emit more particulate matter and even worse is that it is fine particulate matter small enough to get into your bloodstream.
...

My understanding is that this is being corrected. At least in NA, dunno about Europe.

And I suspect with all the research billions being put into electric cars these days, we will see most city diesels being replaced with electric cars rather sooner than later. Especially as some cities plan to restrict both diesel and gas vehicles.

[NJRVer]

ShinerBock wrote:

John & Angela wrote:

Good morning.

I don’t know. I’m not a science guy, but I’ve stood on street corners in those and many other euoropean cities. The diesel fumes can be overwhelming. I get people’s concerns. Especially if their kids have respiratory problems. I don’t see how it can hurt to reduce the amount of old diesels driving around those cities.

JMHO.

John.

Here is the issue with that. They are replacing those diesels with engines that actually emit more particulate matter and even worse is that it is fine particulate matter small enough to get into your bloodstream. The PM on the old pre DPF diesels is coarse and cannot get into your blood stream, but people can see it and not the PM from GDI engines so they ignorantly feel safer with the GDI engine.

There is a solution to the PM problem on diesels that has been around for a while and it is called a DPF. In many cases, the air going into these new diesels engines is dirtier than what is going out of the tailpipe. Requiring that all diesel engines in the city have DPF's is a better solution than replacing those old diesels with GDI engines if PM was a a health concern. However, it "feels good" to just ride the "look I am doing something" wave by the politicians even though they are making it worse.


Or an even better solution, stop living in such a highly populated area.

It may not get into your blood stream, but it lodges in your lungs.

[John___Angela]

ShinerBock wrote:

John & Angela wrote:

Good morning.

I don’t know. I’m not a science guy, but I’ve stood on street corners in those and many other euoropean cities. The diesel fumes can be overwhelming. I get people’s concerns. Especially if their kids have respiratory problems. I don’t see how it can hurt to reduce the amount of old diesels driving around those cities.

JMHO.

John.

Here is the issue with that. They are replacing those diesels with engines that actually emit more particulate matter and even worse is that it is fine particulate matter small enough to get into your bloodstream. The PM on the old pre DPF diesels is coarse and cannot get into your blood stream, but people can see it and not the PM from GDI engines so they ignorantly feel safer with the GDI engine.

There is a solution to the PM problem on diesels that has been around for a while and it is called a DPF. In many cases, the air going into these new diesels engines is dirtier than what is going out of the tailpipe. Requiring that all diesel engines in the city have DPF's is a better solution than replacing those old diesels with GDI engines if PM was a a health concern. However, it "feels good" to just ride the "look I am doing something" wave by the politicians even though they are making it worse.


Or an even better solution, stop living in such a highly populated area.

I get the DPF thing. I know our 2003 Cummins is stinkier than the new pushers.

People need to live in cities. Otherwise they have to commute which brings the problem full circle.

Interesting info on the size of the particles. Didn’t know that. Kinda comes down to lesser of two evils I suppose.

But I think leaving it up to the manufacturers is not an option. They just won’t do anything. It is governments role to regulate this kind of thing. Now we just need to find good politicians. :).

Cheers.

John.

[ShinerBock]

John & Angela wrote:

Good morning.

I don’t know. I’m not a science guy, but I’ve stood on street corners in those and many other euoropean cities. The diesel fumes can be overwhelming. I get people’s concerns. Especially if their kids have respiratory problems. I don’t see how it can hurt to reduce the amount of old diesels driving around those cities.

JMHO.

John.

Here is the issue with that. They are replacing those diesels with engines that actually emit more particulate matter and even worse is that it is fine particulate matter small enough to get into your bloodstream. The PM on the old pre DPF diesels is coarse and cannot get into your blood stream, but people can see it and not the PM from GDI engines so they ignorantly feel safer with the GDI engine.

There is a solution to the PM problem on diesels that has been around for a while and it is called a DPF. In many cases, the air going into these new diesels engines is dirtier than what is going out of the tailpipe. Requiring that all diesel engines in the city have DPF's is a better solution than replacing those old diesels with GDI engines if PM was a a health concern. However, it "feels good" to just ride the "look I am doing something" wave by the politicians even though they are making it worse.


Or an even better solution, stop living in such a highly populated area.

[John___Angela]

hone eagle wrote:

John & Angela wrote:
This is happening about a year sooner than many expected. It’s coming down to a public health issue and it can’t happen soon enough for many parents. It’s the 25 to 40 crowd pushing this in Europe. Can’t blame them. Makes sense.

https://electrek.co/2018/02/27/german-cities-allowed-disel-ban/

What a pile - and the comment section a sea of stupidity
much missing from the blog or whatever it is,I am german and get a lot more 'news' then this .
The 'ban' is graduated most dirty first ,oldest first, by the time its really a all out ban two election cycles will have passed.
So another 'feel good' law by politicians who know they are dealing with religious fanatics ,they will be long gone before the cr8p hits the fan.
But eco nuts are appeased.

Good morning.

I don’t know. I’m not a science guy, but I’ve stood on street corners in those and many other euoropean cities. The diesel fumes can be overwhelming. I get people’s concerns. Especially if their kids have respiratory problems. I don’t see how it can hurt to reduce the amount of old diesels driving around those cities.

JMHO.

John.

[ShinerBock]

hone eagle wrote:


What a pile - and the comment section a sea of stupidity
much missing from the blog or whatever it is,I am german and get a lot more 'news' then this .
The 'ban' is graduated most dirty first ,oldest first, by the time its really a all out ban two election cycles will have passed.
So another 'feel good' law by politicians who know they are dealing with religious fanatics ,they will be long gone before the cr8p hits the fan.
But eco nuts are appeased.

That is one of the most accurate descriptions I have ever heard about these laws. They are "feel good" laws and many of of the Eco nuts who actually believe their GDI Sonic turbo is cleaner than a modern diesel is appeased. They don't know the facts and are just going along with whatever their favorite social activists(which doesn't know the facts either) is telling them. You would think that these people would ask for some kind of proof or data before believing them, but the fact is that they want to believe them even over an automotive engineer who works in the industry.

[hone_eagle]

John & Angela wrote:
This is happening about a year sooner than many expected. It’s coming down to a public health issue and it can’t happen soon enough for many parents. It’s the 25 to 40 crowd pushing this in Europe. Can’t blame them. Makes sense.

https://electrek.co/2018/02/27/german-cities-allowed-disel-ban/

What a pile - and the comment section a sea of stupidity
much missing from the blog or whatever it is,I am german and get a lot more 'news' then this .
The 'ban' is graduated most dirty first ,oldest first, by the time its really a all out ban two election cycles will have passed.
So another 'feel good' law by politicians who know they are dealing with religious fanatics ,they will be long gone before the cr8p hits the fan.
But eco nuts are appeased.

[John___Angela]

This is happening about a year sooner than many expected. It’s coming down to a public health issue and it can’t happen soon enough for many parents. It’s the 25 to 40 crowd pushing this in Europe. Can’t blame them. Makes sense.

https://electrek.co/2018/02/27/german-cities-allowed-disel-ban/

[RinconVTR]

Copperhead wrote:

RinconVTR wrote:
Small diesels in North American will fade like E85.

Emissions (Particulate Filters and DEF systems), higher initially cost, higher fuel cost and higher maintenance costs give recent buyers a LOT of remorse.

Sure the MPG and Torque numbers looks good on paper...until you own one and find its slow as H E double L, MPG does not offset higher fuel and maintenance costs, and you do not like how unreliable it is.

Wait for more owners fall out of warranty and have to pay out of pocket for various high priced repairs under 100k total miles. We'll see online complaints flood the internet. Ya'll just wait!

Wow! Has E85 faded? Many of us never got the memo. Filled up the other day for $1.66 a gallon for E85. Several years ago when we were bumping $4 a gallon for gas, my pickup lived on E85 for almost two years which I could buy for $1.50 less than regular gas. Same deal with today's prices in my area. E85 for $1.66 and regular gas for $2.49. that kind of a price spread, and even with the lower mpg for E85 I still save almost 3 cents per mile fuel cost by using E85 compared to regular gas.

You're living a fairy-tail. One, you live were a vast majority of Ethanol is grown and refined, thus is the cheapest anyone will find per gallon. Two, it is HEAVILY subsidized by the Feds/EPA. Three, you get LESS MPG by a significant margin. Four, you clearly never looked at the different maintenance required for running E85 all the time in many popular vehicles. (more frequent oil changes is most common)

Power wise, diesels are "always slower" unless they have huge displacements and very high PSI turbo charge pressures. If you want performance, you just lost your efficiency gains over gas.

As far as "providing data", I find that funny when people ask. I could make up and post my own "data" (made up or not) and would anyone believe it more than my statements? Ha. No. Not a chance.

You do your own research if my comments spark interest or questions.

[mich800]

This just in. Trucks and Jeep seem to still be good to go.

[Bedlam]

Don't you take 30 percent mileage hit running E85 verses regular gasoline plus the engine typically derates when running such high percentage of ethanol.

[ShinerBock]

RinconVTR wrote:
Small diesels in North American will fade like E85.

Emissions (Particulate Filters and DEF systems), higher initially cost, higher fuel cost and higher maintenance costs give recent buyers a LOT of remorse.

Sure the MPG and Torque numbers looks good on paper...until you own one and find its slow as H E double L, MPG does not offset higher fuel and maintenance costs, and you do not like how unreliable it is.

Wait for more owners fall out of warranty and have to pay out of pocket for various high priced repairs under 100k total miles. We'll see online complaints flood the internet. Ya'll just wait!

You mind showing me your data from the vehicles you owned that backs up these statements? I would love to see them and compare them with mine.

Also, not all diesel cars are slow. My last diesel car before my 328d was a 2009 335d with a 3.0L inline six turbo diesel that made 265 hp and 425 ln-ft stock in a 3,800 lb sedan. It would keep up V8 Mustangs before I tuned it and after I tuned it to around 325 hp and 500 lb-ft it would completely blow their doors off all while getting 35 mpg combined. Ran it up to 120k miles before getting rid of it and the only repair bills I had on the car had nothing to do with the engine or trans. Still kicking myself for getting rid of it.

[Copperhead]

RinconVTR wrote:
Small diesels in North American will fade like E85.

Emissions (Particulate Filters and DEF systems), higher initially cost, higher fuel cost and higher maintenance costs give recent buyers a LOT of remorse.

Sure the MPG and Torque numbers looks good on paper...until you own one and find its slow as H E double L, MPG does not offset higher fuel and maintenance costs, and you do not like how unreliable it is.

Wait for more owners fall out of warranty and have to pay out of pocket for various high priced repairs under 100k total miles. We'll see online complaints flood the internet. Ya'll just wait!

Wow! Has E85 faded? Many of us never got the memo. Filled up the other day for $1.66 a gallon for E85. Several years ago when we were bumping $4 a gallon for gas, my pickup lived on E85 for almost two years which I could buy for $1.50 less than regular gas. Same deal with today's prices in my area. E85 for $1.66 and regular gas for $2.49. that kind of a price spread, and even with the lower mpg for E85 I still save almost 3 cents per mile fuel cost by using E85 compared to regular gas.

MPG numbers can be impressive, but it is the actual cost per mile that really means anything. On just fuel cost alone, per mile, diesel has no real advantage to me. Compared to what I get for fuel economy on E85 and the price, a diesel in the same pickup would have to get over TWICE the average mpg, at the current price, I am getting on E85. That is not very probable.

In the right circumstances, diesel is a good choice. Just not for my needs. My 3/4 ton Chevy does a excellent job doing all I need to do, and doing it on E85. I already have to use over 20,000 gallons of diesel a year for my commercial needs. No desire to use the stuff in my personal vehicles. Diesel doesn't have that starry eyed mystique to me that it does for some.

[Jarlaxle]

Bedlam wrote:
How many of you remember when the EPA started messing with gasser emission standards in the 70's? It wasn't just the smog pumps - People were peeved when carburetors were sealed to prevent rejetting or adjustments (you couldn't even get in to clean or rebuild them) and then the first generation of throttle body fuel injection started appearing. This eventually was better than the carburetors it replaced but is still a crude way to deliver fuel. Direct injection will help clean up the gasser, but I wouldn't be surprised to see EGR, DPF or even DEF work its way into the gassers as emissions get more stringent. At some point the complexity of any cleaner burning ICE will become costlier than electric vehicles even if the net emissions are the same or less than an EV.

Gas engines have used EGR for 40+ years. They do not need particulate filters, because they produce little or no soot. NOX reduction has already been figured out with no tacked-on urine-injection systems.