Diesel Trumps Hybrid

[Ben]

Interesting --looks like Honda is gonna dump their hybrid for a diesel. I expected that hybrids would disappear as the fad that they are (or remain in the ultra-compact market), but it's starting quicker than I thought. I don't understand why American automakers aren't putting out more diesels -- I'd sure love to have an F-150 diesel.

--------------
http://news.windingroad.com/alternative-fuel/japan-report-hondas-new-diesel-initiative-to-spark-death-rattle-for-accord-hybrid/

Japan Report: Hondas New Diesel Initiative To Spark Death Rattle For Accord Hybrid
Filed Under: Alternative Fuel, Japan, Tech, Trends, Coupes, Sedans, Honda, Future Vehicles, Automotive News January 5th, 2007 9:37 AM

accord-hybrid-taillamp.jpgHonda president Takeo Fukui has been quoted in the Japanese press as saying that a next generation V-6 diesel will be commercialized by Honda, and is set to slot into the Ridgeline along with other unspecified models.

First, though, Honda will kick off with its 2.2-2.4-litre class, four-cylinder super clean turbodiesel thatll run in the next Stateside Accord, appearing around 2009. This is expected be a breakthrough engine, with emissions as clean as clean as a modern gasoline powerplant, able to meet even the toughest regulations in the world (i.e. the EPAs Tier II Bin 5 regulations).

Once this Accord diesel goes on sale, the Accord hybrid will be quietly retired. Hondas basic eco strategy going forward will be to keep hybrids for Civic-class and below offerings, with diesels for Accord-class models and over.

Or so it would seem, except that Fukui was also recently quoted as saying that Honda will consider a small diesel for the future, too. Presumably, however, if such a drivetrain is produced at all, itll be earmarked for Europe, where diesels make up more than half of the new-car market.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I'd buy a high quality, sensibly made made turbo-diesel.  I've no doubt that Honda could produce such a vehicle if they set their minds to it.

I'm like you.  I can't figure out why such cars aren't on the market already.

[theCZ]

'Bout freakin' time the Japanese come out with a super reliable small diesel engine!  I love my 4cyl Toyota Tacoma, but I always think how much cooler it would be with a small diesel engine in it. 

[Preacherman]

The Japanese have been making and selling such small diesels by the tens of thousands all over the world for many decades now.  The only reason they're not here in the USA is the emission regulations.  Small diesels are, by their nature, not all that efficient, and until recent advances in technology, haven't been able to meet US emissions standards.  However, in the rest of the world, they're wildly popular.  I drove several Toyota and Nissan pickups in South Africa with diesels, and found them excellent.

[Sindawe]

I can't figure out why such cars aren't on the market already.

Diesels are dirty.

Diesels are noisy.

Diesels are underpowered.

Diesels are unreliable.

All misconceptions due to GM's diesel fiasco of the late 1970s.  IIRC, they tried to convert gasoline engines to diesel rather than design a new engine from the ground up to be diesel.  I would have loved to pickup a diesel VW when my Civic died, but could not afford to keep the rental I was in while waiting on the lead time for one.

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

Ford is making quiet noises about a 4.4L 8 cylinder diesel for the 2008/2009 F150. This is based on the 3.6L twin turbo diesel from Land Rover.  Torque output is rumored to be greater than the current PowerStroke diesel output of the F250/350 and towing capacity is said to be around 10,000 lbs to 14,000 lbs ...in the F150.

Ford also is working on a hybrid in the F150 that uses a hydraulic fluid for the alternative power transmission medium rather than an electric engine, using recombinant braking to compress large hydraulic cylinders for city driving. Numbers I've heard bandied about state that the city mileage figures in early test mules are > 60 mpg.

I'd buy a Tacoma today if they'd put a turbodiesel in it. For that matter, I'd buy the F150 diesel. I've heard about Honda's Eurospec diesels for a couple of years now. I'm sure it'll be as technologically advanced as their CVCC design was in its day. A diesel in a Ridgeline would be a modest saving grace for that monstrosity. In an Accord, it'd be a world-beater.

Regards,
Rabbit.

[wingnutx]

I drove a diesel Ford Ranger all over Iraq.

I'd love a diesel engine in my Amigo back home.

I'd also like a diesel welder/generator, but those are so much pricier than the gasoline ones that i see for sale everywhere.

[Perd Hapley]

Do all diesel's have noxiously smelly exhaust, or was that just the Bradleys I used to drive? 

[Antibubba]

Given the low RPMs that a diesel engine is capable of, why not a diesel hybrid?  It could be very efficient.

[Harold Tuttle]

There is no need for the complexity of a hybrid if a diesel 4 banger gets 55mpg

one issue with USA diesels has been the sulfur in our diesel mixture

Ultra-low sulphur diesel (ULSD) is a term used to describe a standard for defining diesel fuel with substantially lowered sulphur contents. As of October 15, 2006, most diesel fuel sold at retail locations in the United States and Canada is ULSD.
The move to lower sulphur content is expected to allow the application of newer emissions control technologies that should substantially lower emissions of noxious particulates from diesel engines, similar to changes that previously took place in the European Union. New emissions standards will apply in some states beginning in 2007

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-low_sulfur_diesel

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

So what's the bottom line?  Now that we have low-sulfur diesel available here, the auto makers can market diesel cars and trucks that meet the necessary emissions standards?

[wingnutx]

Do all diesel's have noxiously smelly exhaust, or was that just the Bradleys I used to drive? 

That was the passengers, not the exhaust 

[Iain]

A friend of mine has a Vauxhall Vectra with a 2.2 turbo diesel. Had it for three years now, it has averaged 47mpg over 60,000 miles. You aren't aware that it is a diesel inside, and hardly aware from the outside.

[Firethorn]

So what's the bottom line?  Now that we have low-sulfur diesel available here, the auto makers can market diesel cars and trucks that meet the necessary emissions standards?

Pretty much.  Sulfer's in some ways the lead of gasoline.  It was a cheap solution to a problem in it's time, then it was just being cheap and not removing it.  Modern turbodiesels(IE not american cars) would be clogged horrendously fast with our current diesel.  BTW I thought diesel in some states/locations were already low sulfer, and 2007 was the beginning of national implimentation.

I drove some diesels over in Germany and was seriously impressed.  Heck, that's part of why I'm hanging onto my current car, I was holding out for the next generation vehicles to become economical, whether that was hybrid, diesel, or a car optimized for E85 or 100*.  Diesel sounds very, very good as there's a biological version of the fuel that doesn't require any engine modifications

*IE a much higher compression engine.  If I had to fill up with dino-fuel I'd simply have to use premium.

[Dannyboy]

Since we're on the subject of diesel, can someone explain to me what the deal is with the price of diesel fuel?  Diesel has been at least a  quarter more than regular unleaded and sometimes more than that for over a year.  I thought that diesel was less refined and was therefore supposed to be cheaper.

PS Apologies for the drift.

[Moondoggie]

I own/operate an 18 wheeler, so I can tell you that the higher price for diesel at the pump is due to market factors.  Diesel refining capacity also competes with home heating oil, as well as massive demand by the trucking industry and jet fuel.

I havent' checked the tax rates recently, but the last time I looked the fuel taxes in most states on gas vs. diesel only varied by a few cents per gallon, if at all.

The "Obnoxious smell" of diesel exhaust should only be present when a diesel engine is first started until it warms up.  Once the engine is running at it's intended efficiency there's very little odor.

Sindawe, you might want to rethink your position that diesels are underpowered/unreliable.  Once you put a turbo on one, there's plenty of power.  As far as reliability issues....I have over a million miles on my Detroit and it's never left me alongside the road yet!  I've had the top off of the engine twice...once for a leaking oil seal (warranty) and once for a head gasket @ 940K miles.  I'm still running all 6 original injectors (knock on wood).

I love my "Screaming Green Leaker"!

[Sindawe]

Moondoggie, review my posting.  The perception that diesels are underpowered & unreliable stems from the time when GM put diesels in some of their passenger cars.  THOSE engines were a mess as they were converted gasoline engines.  I do not hold such views.  As I stated, I'd have loved to purchased a diesel vehicle, but the total cost due to having to have a rental while waiting for one was prohibitive at the time.

[mfree]

You are aware that the "converted gasoline engine" part is mostly a myth, right?

GM's problems were (1) no turbo and (2) NO WATER TRAP. ANY water got in the tank and the injection pump would freeze solid, and that's the *good* outcome... the bad one is if the pump let it through, it'd lift the head, warp it, break a piston, etc.

The Olds diesel block is quite a bit heavier than the standard block, bigger mains, etc. That's not a conversion.

GM screwed it up because they didn't want to add a $15 part that meant *gasp* maintenance to empty on a regular basis.

[Sindawe]

You are aware that the "converted gasoline engine" part is mostly a myth, right?

Citation?  This is where I got the data about the converted gasoline engine.

In the 1970s and 1980s, GM pushed Diesel engines and cylinder deactivation technologies to disastrous results due to poor durability in the Oldsmobile diesels (this was a modified gasoline engine) and drivability issues in the Cadillac 4-6-8 variable cylinder engines.

Source: http://www.generalwatch.com/editorials/editorial.cfm?EdID=93

If that is incorrect I'll happily post a retraction.  I was not aware of the lack of a water trap in the design.  Stupid choice in my eyes, since it seems to me that GM could have put the draining of the trap as part of the routine maintenance schedule and tacked on some extra fees to take care of it at the dealer => more profit.

[Werewolf]

A  friend of mine at work is seriously into HOT cars. My boss is too. At more than one lunch hot cars comes up as a topic. According to both, American car makers seriously detune the diesel engines in cars for the public. By detuning them they lower the stresses on the engine and increase longevity.

According to both, one can buy a third party add on module that reprograms the internal computer used to control the engine and double or triple the power available. Those modules run about $500 or so are programmed to work once and restore the original programming once.

I have a hard time believing what they say but since they both say the same thing and at different times it's plausible.

Anyone here know anything about this?

[Tallpine]

A neighbor and I were discussing this a while back (he has had several Dodge Cummins pickups).

An 18-wheeler gets what...?  5-7 mpg?  To move about 80,000 pounds.

So why can't a 6,000 pound pickup/SUV get 60-80 mpg???


I don't have to haul big loads all the time, so I could get by with a full-size pickup with a smaller diesel (4 cyl maybe?) - something comparable to a mid-size V8.  It could still pull a horse trailer or flatbed around as long as you don't expect to go up long steep hills at 70 mph.

[drewtam]

A neighbor and I were discussing this a while back (he has had several Dodge Cummins pickups).

An 18-wheeler gets what...?  5-7 mpg?  To move about 80,000 pounds.

So why can't a 6,000 pound pickup/SUV get 60-80 mpg???

It just doesn't scale that way. But if you had as many gears and drove as slowly, you might get close.

I think there are several reasons diesels never took off in the US:
diesel price premium
no fuel price advantage
heavier
smell
noise
low specific output
smokey

ULSD does have a significant emissions advantage, and therefore you can better NOx and PM aftertreatments. With better PM aftertreatment you can run a richer full load mixture getting up to 60-70% stoichometric. That means more power, and better specific output. Better specific output means you can reduce the size and weight and overall price of the engine. The better NOx reduction also helps prevent smog, and smell.

But a major portion of these key drawbacks for automotive use stills exists, even after ULSD. Europe uses diesels becuase they create a massive taxing structure to force it. And I  don't think that is something this board would support.
 
Drew

[Dannyboy]

According to both, one can buy a third party add on module that reprograms the internal computer used to control the engine and double or triple the power available. Those modules run about $500 or so are programmed to work once and restore the original programming once.

I have a hard time believing what they say but since they both say the same thing and at different times it's plausible.

Anyone here know anything about this?

Edge, Banks, and Quadzilla all make them.  A friend of mine has a Quadzilla module on his Dodge and that thing is nuts now.  He's also got a few other things such as a new intake, bigger turbo, etc.  He's embarrassed numerous sports car owners.

[HankB]

Back in the '70's, a neighbor had a diesel Mercedes. (I think it was a 220D?) He claimed he burned "furnace oil" in it, for about half the price of "legal" diesel. Don't know if he was on the level or full of it.

Flash forward to the '80s . . . a colleague at work bought a Blazer (or Jimmy?) with GM's 6.2 liter diesel. He didn't like it - gave him all kinds of problems, especially in winter. (This was Minnesota.)

Now that I'm in TX, I'd consider a diesel before a hybrid. Hybrids have all the potential failure modes of a gas engine, PLUS all those of an electric car, PLUS additional potential failure modes in the interface. And if you keep cars >10 years like I do, you're looking at one, possibly, two, full battery pack replacements. $Ouch!$

Even Consumer Reports, that bastion of political correctness, questions the economic sense of hybrids, once you factor in ALL cost factors.

[Sergeant Bob]

Back in the '70's, a neighbor had a diesel Mercedes. (I think it was a 220D?) He claimed he burned "furnace oil" in it, for about half the price of "legal" diesel. Don't know if he was on the level or full of it.

I'm pretty sure he was on the level (at least it is possible). It's pretty much the same thing other than some additives and TAXES!!!
I've had my tanks checked a few times at weigh stations (chicken houses) for non-road taxed fuel. That's why home heating oil and kerosene is dyed red, for easy identification.