Diesel passenger cars - On the out?

[Rodge]

Just google DPF problems and you'll see ALL the manufacturers are having really serious problems with the operational requirements of these exhaust treatment systems. Its causing massive angst between customers and manufacturers all over the world...unfortunatly I've been there and bought the Tee Shirt. Really puts me off buying another vehicle from the same manufacturer...and I suspect there could be perhaps tens of millions of customers who have been through the same drama.

Diesel vehicles equipped with DPF systems are most definitly NOT suited to constant short trip around the city only operation, which is actually how many vehicles are used.

[XR Martin]

We've got commercial vehicles at work and had nothing but problems with DPFs. I imagine cars that do alot shorter trips are a nightmare, especially since the average person would just keep driving when the light on the dash is telling them to do a burnoff. And because they run so rich when doing a burn, they can end up filling the sump with diesel if it happens too often.
Then theres the Urea injection, and making sure its constantly refilled.

Diesel engines have greater longevity? LOLs. Maybe a 2.8L Hilux or a 4.2 Patrol.
Youd be lucky to get 150k out of a set of injectors and fuel pump on a modern diesel.

[Franco Cozzo]

The engine isn't the problem, its the injection system like the rubbish Siemens injection system on my Focus.

Not enough diesel too much semen.

[Bossxr8]

Diesotto hybrid petrol/diesel engines are the way of the future. Within 10 years diesel engines will be phased out by these.



http://www.autoevolution.com/news/di...ined-5656.html

Whereas up until now the automotive enthusiast knew of roughly only two large scale-use engines, the gasoline and the diesel, technological developments and new requirements imposed by economical or environmental reasons caused a type of "natural evolution" for the engine. It was only natural that at one point the battle between the low fuel consumption and emissions of a diesel and the performances of a gasoline would have ended, one way or another. But a marriage between the two...

Mercedes Benz's DiesOtto engine promises to bring the best of both types of engines into one unit. By taking the "benefits of a diesel engine" and making it run on "on regular old unleaded", the German manufacturer envisions the future of the gasoline engine and perhaps the end of the diesel. The experimental 4 cylinder in-line 1.8l engine (238 horsepower and 400 Nm of torque), first showcased in 2007, is built on technologies, explained below, borrowed from both Rudolf Diesel's and Nicolaus Otto's creations.

Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI)


⌕ HCCI
HCCI is a type of internal combustion that combines the traditional spark ignition (spark from a spark plug ignites the fuel mix) with the compression ignition (heat caused by compressing the fuel mix ignites it). HCCI is a lean combustion process, providing a lower local flame temperature which lowers the amount of Nitric Oxide (NOx) produced in the process. HCCI works by igniting the air/fuel mixture when the concentration and temperature are high enough.

Advantages of the system are that it provides up to 15 percent lower fuel consumption than regular engines. HCCI engines can work on diesel compression ratios, providing better efficiency than spark ignited gasoline engines while the even mix of fuel and air translates into lower emission.

The downsides are that high pressure in the cylinders may damage them in time, while high temperatures will wear down the engine faster than usual. The power range provided by HCCI engines is restricted and carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions caused by the fast combustion are higher than in a spark ignited engine.



Have a look at the power and torque figures from a 1.8L 4 potter. And this was in 5 years ago.

[Nic85]

Good power and torque for sure. I can't help but get stuck on the part about wearing engines quicker and higher emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. Those are a massive no-no, particularly in Europe where cars are required to get an MOT every year for registration. I'm sure they'll fix it though.

[Rodge]

And because they run so rich when doing a burn, they can end up filling the sump with diesel if it happens too often.

Yeap, the dipstick on my Merc was going up at the rate of 1 litre of diesel getting into the sump for every 3,000 km's travelled. Fuel / oil dilution got over 20% at one stage !!!!!
Plenty of fodder for serious discussions with Mercedes-benz I tell ya !!
Unless people are driving on the open road at 50 m.p.h. plus for a continuious period of 20 minutes or more at least once EVERY WEEK, or are prepared to artifically modify their driving to do this, its very hard for the exhaust temperature to achieve the necessary heat to achieve an effective DPF regeneration. Don't / can't /won't do this open road running each week then I strongly recommend not buying a diesel vehicle with a DPF. There are some around that don't have these dreadful systems in their exhausts, noteable example is the diesel Terry.

BossXR8 - Yeah - Mercedes-benz have been rabbiting on about that for a while now but there's no sign of it coming to market. Last I heard they think Hydrogen powered cars are the answer. M Benz make some exceptionally good engines and their latest twin turbo 5.5 V8 is a classic case in point and is capable of 410 Kw's and 800 nm's and gets a remarkable (for the power) ~ 10L/100 km's in most applications, pity they charge like its made from solid gold.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Diesel engines have greater longevity? LOLs. Maybe a 2.8L Hilux or a 4.2 Patrol.
Youd be lucky to get 150k out of a set of injectors and fuel pump on a modern diesel.

Check out the later model Euro diesels which in general are bulletproof, not the lame attempt the japs have made in the last 10 years, most of which have been hand grenades. IMO diesel cars had their place in the 2000s when the petrol alternative wasn't too flash. Now with small capacity direct inject turbo petrols they offer superior performance and similar fuel economy.
Road transport lead the way for diesel emissions standards and a European Euro 6 truck puts out roughly 6% of NOx and 3% PM to what they were 20 years ago. Road transport in Europe is the most efficient way to move freight per tonne per km in fuel burn and emmitted emmissions yet still not good enough for the pen pusher enviro nazis. A European Euro 5 truck needed SCR to meet the standard, which is a pretty simple system and relatively trouble free, to meet Euro 6 add EGR and DPF, also add higher fuel consumption, higher maintenacne and most likely higher down time. No doubt engine makers pour millions into R&D but add the strain of EGR and DPF to an existing engine and who know what common issues will turn up in time under different operating conditions. I dont know what is need for cars to meet Euro 6, but if passenger vehicles were to go down this path to meet the standard you can only imagine the head aches for owners, not to mention resale value when the thing is 5 years old and no one will touch it with a 10 ft pole.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Because I'd rather be getting forty or fifty miles per gallon out of a long lived turbo diesel and maybe producing a bit more CO2 (or whatever the boogie man is this week...) than getting 35mpg from a shorter lived petrol engine...

That's why I have a diesel too, but as a decent diesel puts out less emmissions than a petrol it's the petrols that need to reduce emmissions not the other way around.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by KIWI-1

That's why I have a diesel too, but as a decent diesel puts out less emmissions than a petrol it's the petrols that need to reduce emmissions not the other way around.

What emissions are you talking about? Because diesels emit far more Nitrogen Oxide than an equivalent petrol engine.
For example a BMW 520d emits 10 times more NOx than a 520i.

NOx is alot nastier than CO2...

NOx reacts with ammonia, moisture, and other compounds to form nitric acid vapor and related particles. Small particles can penetrate deeply into sensitive lung tissue and damage it, causing premature death in extreme cases. Inhalation of such particles may cause or worsen respiratory diseases, such as emphysema or bronchitis, or may also aggravate existing heart disease.[7]

NOx reacts with volatile organic compounds in the presence of sunlight to form Ozone. Ozone can cause adverse effects such as damage to lung tissue and reduction in lung function mostly in susceptible populations (children, elderly, asthmatics). Ozone can be transported by wind currents and cause health impacts far from the original sources. The American Lung Association estimates that nearly 50 percent of United States inhabitants live in counties that are not in ozone compliance.[8]

NOx destroys ozone in the stratosphere.[9] Ozone in the stratosphere absorbs ultraviolet light, which is potentially damaging to life on earth.[10] NOx from combustion sources does not reach the stratosphere; instead, NOx is formed in the stratosphere from photolysis of nitrous oxide.[9]

NOx also readily reacts with common organic chemicals, and even ozone, to form a wide variety of toxic products: nitroarenes, nitrosamines and also the nitrate radical some of which may cause biological mutations. Recently another pathway, via NOx, to ozone has been found that predominantly occurs in coastal areas via formation of nitryl chloride when NOx comes into contact with salt mist

[Nic85]

He's probably referring to the C02 outputs.

[usernametaken]

And yet no one has mentioned EcoLpi....

go figure... ;)

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Nic85

Good power and torque for sure. I can't help but get stuck on the part about wearing engines quicker and higher emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. Those are a massive no-no, particularly in Europe where cars are required to get an MOT every year for registration. I'm sure they'll fix it though.

They will get on top of those issues over time, this article was 5 years old and i'm sure they will have achieved a lot in that timeframe.

GM are going full steam ahead with this technology now too, as i'm sure most others are as well.

[csv8]

http://brisbanetimes.drive.com.au/mo...116-29fop.html

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

They will get on top of those issues over time, this article was 5 years old and i'm sure they will have achieved a lot in that timeframe.

GM are going full steam ahead with this technology now too, as i'm sure most others are as well.

The problem is a metalurgic one. It would take expensive high strength alloys to absorb that added heat and pressure in operation.

The added performance benefits would also probably be countered by more robust, catalytic converters to reduce the extra CO2 and hydrocarbons.

Originally Posted by usernametaken

And yet no one has mentioned EcoLpi....

go figure... ;)

LPi is the solution. You might get the power and torque of a six from a four pot LPi engine. Not to mention far less nasties.

[Werd.]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Because I'd rather be getting forty or fifty miles per gallon out of a long lived turbo diesel and maybe producing a bit more CO2 (or whatever the boogie man is this week...) than getting 35mpg from a shorter lived petrol engine...

Shorter lived... hah... I don't know of many petrol engines that wouldn't make it to 300,000km without trouble?

Diesels always blowing turbos etc aren't more reliable.

[Rodge]

IMO diesel cars had their place in the 2000s when the petrol alternative wasn't too flash. Now with small capacity direct inject turbo petrols they offer superior performance and similar fuel economy.

I tend to agree when it comes to smaller vehicles. Classic case in point is the new 2012 3 series BMW.
320D 2.0 diesel making 135 Kw's and 380 nm's 4.4 L/100 km's
328 2.0 Petrol making 180 Kw's and 350 nm's 6.3L/100 km's
Both great vehicles but the petrol is a very capable performance vehicle with performacne of 0-100 in 6.2 seconds and there have been long order books all around the world. If I were chossing between these two I'd definitly take the 328, its still really efficient but with another 45 Kw's and a vastly better spread of torque its no wonder its a runaway sales sucess.

[aussie muscle]

When diesel started to take off in europe, it was 50% the cost of petrol here. a worthwhile saving. now that it's same or higher, it doesn't matter one way or the other.

[TheSneakiness]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Just google DPF problems and you'll see ALL the manufacturers are having really serious problems with the operational requirements of these exhaust treatment systems. Its causing massive angst between customers and manufacturers all over the world...unfortunatly I've been there and bought the Tee Shirt. Really puts me off buying another vehicle from the same manufacturer...and I suspect there could be perhaps tens of millions of customers who have been through the same drama.

Diesel vehicles equipped with DPF systems are most definitly NOT suited to constant short trip around the city only operation, which is actually how many vehicles are used.

Yes... I was in the middle of this such issue as recently as last week. Because it recirculates the exhaust gas in front of the "throttle" it easily clogs up with soot and crap and blocks the air flow sensor on the cold side piping causing surging and excess fuel usage.

Diesel in my opinion in the last 4 years of motoring has provided no better running costs, if anything it's cost me more maintenance and running cost wise and as for fuel use, if I compared my old AU ute with Pajero it would've covered the same distance on a full tank.

[Poetic Justice]

Keep in mind, a Toyota rep will tell you all the negatives about diesel models because we don't offer them. If Toyota announced tomorrow that they were going to bring the diesel Corolla to the Australian market, watch his attitude change towards it.

[mik]

What ever happened to the enviro fuel, I remember when the stuff came out, (dirty looking crud ), some truckys liked it because it was a tad cheaper, I would never put the stuff in my tanks for fear of blocking up the filters, blokes did say they seemed to run well on the stuff.

[Blutigre]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Just google DPF problems and you'll see ALL the manufacturers are having really serious problems with the operational requirements of these exhaust treatment systems. Its causing massive angst between customers and manufacturers all over the world...unfortunatly I've been there and bought the Tee Shirt. Really puts me off buying another vehicle from the same manufacturer...and I suspect there could be perhaps tens of millions of customers who have been through the same drama.

Diesel vehicles equipped with DPF systems are most definitly NOT suited to constant short trip around the city only operation, which is actually how many vehicles are used.

There are some companies now that are cleaning them out of the car due to the city driving and the crap that can happen when they regenerate in the vehicle. its heaps chaeper than a replacement. This mob is in WA, I dont know about other states: http://www.ghta.com.au/products/dies...le-filter.html

[Smoke Pursuit]

My Diesel territory probably saves me $20 per week, based on the better economy... But the thing I like about it the best is the convenience... having an extra 200 kms per tank saves alot of stuffing around!

[weairy]

Originally Posted by SCUD

Keep in mind, a Toyota rep will tell you all the negatives about diesel models because we don't offer them. If Toyota announced tomorrow that they were going to bring the diesel Corolla to the Australian market, watch his attitude change towards it.

Toyota aren't bringing out small diesel cars, sure. But they're making a bit of movement there.

2013 RAV4; first RAV with a 2.0lt T/Diesel.

But then Toyota doesn't really need a "fuel efficient" alternative; Prius, Prius V, Prius C, Hybrid Camry... Kind of defeats the purpose of requiring a small diesel...

[Olbucko]

Originally Posted by Werd.

Shorter lived... hah... I don't know of many petrol engines that wouldn't make it to 300,000km without trouble?

Diesels always blowing turbos etc aren't more reliable.

My 2002 Subaru has done 410,000, engine and fuel system has never been touched apart from timing belts and oil changes. Engine allways starts first time and idles like new, uses 1/2 litre of oil per 1000 km. no noises, smoke, or rattles

My Territory has done 200,000, has only needed a set of spark plugs, oil consumption between changes, (15,000), too little to measure, still performs like new.

Both these NA old tech engines should easily go well past the 1/2 million mark with minimal care and expence. In fact, a well maintained Falcon 6 can last at least a million km.

Who needs hi tech turbo diesels or tubo Di petrol engines that require new injectors and fuel pumps after as little as 100,000 km costing thousands of dollars. Every second week I read letters in the motoring section of the papers from somebody who has major problems with the fuel system in their near new diesel or Di petrol car

As I see it the car with a reliable trouble free engine is cheaper to run than one with a hi tech engine that saves you a few dollars a week in fuel costs, but costs you thousands of dollars to service

[Falcman0o7]

Remove 2 main bearings from engine.
Now you have a diesel falcon.