xtoyz17

I can’t help but wonder if the big 3 are about shoot themselves in the feet. These new light duty diesels are coming to the market and the worst time possible. Stricter emissions, weakening dollar, and sky rocketing fuel prices are a few of the reasons. I’d say 3-4 years ago would’ve been optimal.

I’ve been wondering about this for some time without saying much, but I think they’re just too late in the game. The added economy doesn’t have a chance of being a selling point with the recent sky rocketing fuel costs. Especially not with the extra money required up front, virgin engines and technology, “theories” of a recession, etc….

In the end if these don’t work out, it’s really gonna put a hurting on the big 3.


What do you all think?

96_12V

The main reasons they DIDN'T come out with diesels 4-5 years back were the pending 2007 & 2010 emissions regulaitons, and the lack of avalibility of ULSD diesel. It would have been pointless to being out new engines only to have to redesign them in the next 3 years. Plus, engine manufacturers barely had enough time to get thier product ready for 2007 regulations.

You're right, I would have loved a 2005 BMW 330d (E46-chassis) but since the engine offered in Europe required ULSD and wouldn't meet 2007 CARB standards, it would have been too expensive to modify it to run on our sooty 500 ppm diesel. It would work now, but it's too late.

ian515

I would love it if we had some light duty options. But I think you are right, this might hurt them. who knows. maybe they have friends in the gas price business that know something we dont.

hammerjammer

I agree. I believe the oil prices will change the light duty truck market forever,I can't see using a truck as a daily driver,at the current prices and who knows how high they will go. Most prople who drive light trucks don't need them,they like myself and many others just enjoy driving a truck.

wcbcruzer

It is at the worst possible time (although it can get worse). But I think if the fuel mileage is good, they will still be able to sell a good amount. Maybe not as much as before but enough to make a profit. Maybe they'll just produce less to begin with. I don't see why a smaller, lighter 1/2 ton diesel couldn't get 28-30 mpg hwy. That's better than any 1/2 ton out there right now. Yeah, who knows... Maybe they do know something we don't. After all, I GUARANTEE they wouldn't produce something that wouldn't make them a profit.

johnh

for your information......CARB=California Air Resources Board

patdaly

1.) It all depends on their decision to either get mileage or power. Lets face it, light duty diesels do not need to be hot rods, yet that appears as if what each of the big 3 are worried about. No, I won't buy a V8 300 Hp 1/2 ton. I would buy a 30-32 MPG 1/2 ton that ran reasonably well.

2.) Why the HECK can't we adopt Euro4 emissions? They seem to be plenty good for Europe where crowding is worse than here? Why did they revise the stupid Diesel emissions here just as we could have gotten clean Euro4 cars that are CURRENTLY being built right here?

All in all, I think they are shooting themselves in the feet.

HOHN

Pat, I suspect the failure to adopt Euro-4 has a couple components:

1) pressure from enviro groups to go even farther
2) Desire to avoid tacitly admitting the Europeans may have done something right
3) Protectionism, as European manufacturers could then instantly flood the US market with vehicles.

By adopting my stringent standards, the US protected American businesses from the headstart their European rivals may have had.

The emissions thing has been a blessing to Cummins-- but only now that they have developed the solutions needed to meet the considerable challenges. Cat and Internation, by comparison are still struggling to enact their own solutions for the long term. Cat is actually BUYING their aftertreatment systems from Cummins!

74dart

You also have to consider the new energy bill that requires anything with a GVWR of less than 8500lbs to have an average fuel econmy of 35mpg highway. Wheather the new 1/2 ton diesels sale or not the auto makers have to have them to bring up the average.

patdaly

Hohn:

1.) I agree, however this is the problem we face, do we waste fuel forever while cottoning to environmental whackos, or do we use common sense?
2.) That is as nuts as what we did, leapfrog their standards. But then again, where do we find common sense?
3.) Protectionism has nothing to do with it, because the big 3 are currently selling Euro4 vehicles, and at least Chrysler is building them right here. They could pretty much control the market right away.

74Dart, somehow I believe they will just pay the gas guzzler tax and move on....... I doubt you see 35 MPG out of any full size truck unless fuel hits 7 bucks.

Fred Swanson

It's environmentalist driven EPA standards. They don't want a bigger diesel market in any of the platforms. The way the EPA standards are written(for gas emissions), they expect diesel to match it coming in.

It sure seems like the days of the diesel are going the way of the 60's muscle cars.

Just my thoughts on it.

96_12V

This is definetly not good news, but really worth a read. (sorry - it's really long.....)

http://wardsautoworld.com/ar/auto_showdown_california/

hamilton71801

I say Cali needs to produce thier own line of autos if the current ones aren't good enough for them and their environment. Boy, I'm getting sick of all this nit-picky crap and someone needs to teach the terminator a lesson.

xtoyz17

I love this part

"Schwarzenegger reportedly commutes daily from his home in Brentwood to the state capitol in Sacramento via private jet."

Cough*hypocrite*cough

wcbcruzer

He does not...

You guys want to know the ironic thing about CA? Despite the stricter emissions regulations, diesels DO NOT need to be smogged. But in the state of NV where gambling and prostitution are legal, you need to smog your diesel. Makes me wonder... But I sure ain't complaining. And another thing. All these "strict rules" you hear about emissions don't affect the average driver that much, if at all.