Smkndzl

Dang, as far as the PM's in the air New York City is one of the worse in the nation, I was just there last week, If we had followed what Europe is doing , we would have PM traps and Urea injection long ago. they have been using it since 2001.

JJPage

COOLBREEZE!!

wheatwhacker

How about this.
Kick all the hobos, crackheads and unemployed out of San Francisco, give affordable housing to the people that work there and not have to commute 60 miles one way because they WANT to work. I'm sure that'll reduce emissions, save the city a bunch of money and give a lot of former commuters more time to work out, thus reducing health care costs, less shooting with all the shooters living in the desert, less wasting of water cleaning up crap on the streets, the list goes on and on.

ME for mayor.

MLRey

Hey, I live in the desert . I'm glad they're in the big city and not wandering around here .

Don M

The 6.7 mileage is hurting partially from the post injection events that do nothng to add power, but are instead used to heat the DPF. Basically you a have .5 millisecond burst of fuel late in the cycle to make heat in the exhaust system. Part of your tank of fuel is being used for heating. This system is a temporary, stop gap fix in the cycle of emission laws VS the manufacturers. And the consumer gets to pay for it.

The MBZ system is much better, but as you mentioned the EPA until recently had done little to no studies on UREA for health concerns, etc. Their are also many injection system refinements in the works form all the major manufacturers soon be released. Many rumors are floating around now that a new injection system for the 6.7 is right around the corner for 09. Lets hope so.

rjm022

oxy moron isn't it?? the liberals bowed down to the enviromentalists- feds pass new stricter diesel emission laws to reduce pollution- in doing so,diesel mileage drops significantly-causing diesel owners to buy more diesel (foreign oil) to drive the same amount of miles. solved a lot-didn't it?????

squirrelmasta

I actually just made the mistake of selling my 05 Chevy 1/2 ton for a car. I am saving about $200 a month now though. A bump from 12-15 mpg's to a solid 25 mpgs. Here in Seattle Diesel is running $4.19/gal. Hard to justify any diesel unless it can pay for it self or is really needed for work or hobby and you can afford it.

I know the new 4.5 L Dmax they are planning on throwing in the 1/2 tons in 2010 is running a urea. I know Ford and Dodge are both planning on diesel 1/2 tons but seems like chevy is farther along with it currently.

As car as the car goes, i'm happy with it now for commuting and it will be interesting to see what happenes with gas prices this summer. Hopefully a diesel is still an option for myself in the future.

And coolbreeze, that was way to funny! Hopefully we don't get stuck with paying a stupid Global tax along with everyones health care costs.

Lil Dog

Well the Urea method might be old school very soon... Leave it up to a couple CANUKS to come up with a solution, even though we aren't being beaten with the same stick.

Diesel Technology Magazine

confused89

Let me tell you all something. You can all wonder if such a vehicle is going to have urea injection by such a date, but I will tell you that all diesel engines will have it on them by 2013. From what I hear it will be the only way for the diesel manufactures to meet emissions. Urea is a reality for 2010. Start expecting to see it pop up around fueling stations. Also I hate the stuff. Smells awful, just plain nasty. I had to help move two 55 gallon drums of it last week and I think that I will be having to move more of them in the future.

HOHN

From what I've read, the 5.6L V-8 Cummins for the Ram 1500 is pretty much ready to go. I'm pretty sure it will have the urea SCR.

JMO

soulezoo

Why do people pick on us poor canucks??

haftrek

I was at the 2008 Moab Jeep Safari and stopped in to talk to the Hummer representative. We talked about diesels (one coming out in the H2). The rep stated that there is testing going on regarding urea injection (i.e. GM) might be getting it soon!

FMB

Ummmm.... no, not all diesel trucks. This is for trucks with a GVWR greater than 14,000 pounds. An '08 Laramie Megacab's GVWR is only 10,500.


(b) Scope and Applicability.

plessm

I agree. Who needs 350 hp and 650 lb-ft of torque? In my opinion, 90% of us only need that much power to crest the grade at 65 mph with the A/C on pulling 10,000 lbs. I believe there's probably only a small percentage that need this much power to pull extremely heavy loads for a living.

If I could go to my local Dodge dealer and get a 200 hp tune to de-tune from 325 to improve mpg, I'd do it in a second. $4.31 per gallon is just crazy, and it's only going to go up. My buddy had a 1995 Ford F-250 Powerstroke extended cab long bed 2wd that he pulled a 4 horse trailer with. He would get 24 mph on the highway unloaded, and above 15 pulling. My Grandpa has always been a diesel man as long as I can remember. He had a couple of 6.2 liter GM's, even a late 70's or early 80's Cadillac that was diesel. He was always a GM buyer, but he bought a 1989 Dodge 250 regular cab long bed 2wd with a Cummins. He bought it purely for the motor. He and my Grandmother pulled a 35 foot dual slide out fifth wheel all over the western US after he retired and he loved that truck. He didn't love the interior, but he loved the drivetrain. If I remember right, it had around 160 or 170 hp with 400 lb-ft of torque? But it got outstanding mileage both empty and pulling. If that motor had enough power to pull that big of a 5-er through the Rockies and Sierra's, then why do I need 325 hp? I'd gladly trade 125 hp for 5 additional mpg at this time.

I saw an article the other day, 1999 oil was $16 per barrel. Less than a decade later it's $120 per barrel, and some experts are speculating it could go all the way to $200 per barrel. In a short time, it could cost $200+ to fill my 34 gallon tank. My family and I are outdoorsmen, we choose to go camping, hunting, fishing, dual sport motorcycle riding, snow skiing, etc. I need a 4x4 pickup to help do all these things, pull boats and travel trailers. My little boys love going camping and all these things, but our trips are starting to be farther between because of fuel costs. I really hate to have to change my outdoors lifestyle, I'll do whatever I can to conserve.

Drastic times call for drastic measures. Should speed limits be brought back from 65, 70, and 75 to 55 to conserve? What about a national work week that's 4 10 hour days to take all those commuters off the road one day a week? What about a mandatory 25% of employee workforce telecommute policy?

My truck's motor is computer controlled, why can't I choose to have a 200 hp / 450 lb-ft tune installed to get 18 mpg in town and 24+ on the highway? I'm not sure if it's possible or feasible for Dodge to do this or not, does anyone know?

Sorry so long, but one more story. 14 years ago, my dad and I flew to Oregon to pack up my Grandparent's, (same as above), and move them back close to their family, as they were aging. They rented 2 Ryder trucks, the largest they could get. I'm not sure how long they were, but they were huge, I was surprised we didn't need some special license to drive them, especially me being 19 years old. They were both Top Kick Chevrolet trucks. One had a 454 and the other had a small 150 HP Caterpillar diesel. The diesel was 3 feet longer than the 454 truck. My Grandparents are pack rats and we had to load both of those trucks all the way to the ceiling, front to back, as tight as possible. My dad drove the diesel and I drove the 454. 12 hour trip from Columbia gorge area Oregon to Northern/Central CA. The trucks had the same or very similar fuel capacities. My dad would fuel up every third time I fueled up. My 454 would pull the hills at 45 to 50 mph, when he would be down to 30 mph. But that little CAT got outstanding mileage and the HP rating on the sticker on the valve cover said 150 HP. I was amazed that little motor managed the load we had in that truck.

My brother-in-laws are concrete contractors and haul and pull very heavy loads of materials and equipment. They both have early 90's 12v Cummins 1 tons. Both are stock and manage these loads no problem. I've read many tips here to try to improve my mileage and I get the bird alot because of how slow I drive now, but I'm convinced you can't just drive a 3rd gen truck super easy and attain mpg on par with the 1st gen trucks. I'd love to have the comforts and ride of the 3rd gen with the power and mileage of a first gen. Seems like it could be done easily if there wasn't a horsepower war between manufacturers.

Nsomniac05

If im reading the proposed law correctly, it does not apply to trucks with a GVWR less than 14k. GVWR is just the truck, not how much it can tow, so your GCVWR (with max trailer) can be as much as you need. i read over that law a few times and im pretty sure thats the way its worded... non-binding liberal, and vague, of course of course.