Why the 6.7
07-13-2006, 06:25 AM
#4
Administrator
Originally Posted by JohnCA58
And Cummins will no longer produce the 5.9 liter engine.
07-13-2006, 06:48 AM
#6
Administrator
Originally Posted by J.R.'s_dodge_diesel
I highly doubt that. The 5.9L B series is one of Cummins most succesful engine lines ever, why get rid of a good thing?
This has been the demise of many "good things".
Rich
07-13-2006, 06:53 AM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern Iowa
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J.R.'s_dodge_diesel
I highly doubt that. The 5.9L B series is one of Cummins most succesful engine lines ever, why get rid of a good thing?
Our view of Diesel trucks:
C.A.R.B. and EPA's view of diesel trucks (and engines):
Trending Topics
07-13-2006, 07:46 AM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 5.9 was being used before Dodge started using it. It has many uses in consruction equipment/mining/marine/agriculture/generation/etc. Dodge may drop it in the Ram truck line but its a Cummins engine and has many other applications.
07-14-2006, 12:03 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Austin, TX, Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
believe it or not bigger displacement and more fuel are the two ways the companies are using to meet EPA standards...yep thats right u gotta burn more fuel to be "efficient"
07-14-2006, 12:19 AM
#11
The 5.9 engine sees operation on seven continents and seven seas, there have been millions upon millions produced, and is arguably the most widely used engines of all time. Even if EPA regulations outlawed it, then Cummins would still produce it for the majority of their market not under EPA jurisdiction.
At least, that's what I'd figure.
At least, that's what I'd figure.
07-14-2006, 10:56 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cummins Technical Center, IN
Posts: 6,564
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
5 Posts
EPA doesn't care about efficiency-- they log emissions.
The Europeans value efficiency over emissions (correctly, imo), and that's why they have so many diesels. I'm not aware of any huge smog problems in Europe that are worse than the US, even with our "cleaner" cars
The 5.9 will die in those applications subject to emissions, which is an ever-dwindling category. First emissions only applied to cars, then to "light trucks" (under 8800# GVWR, i think). Now the apply even to semis, mining truck, power plants, and gas trimmers. Anything with an ICE has a good chance of being regulated.
The 6.7 is the future because of "power density" and NOx. You can make all the power you'll ever want with the 5.9 for sure-- but you can't do that AND pass emissions-- the NOx levels will be too high every time. So you have to increase displacement to decrease power density (or HP/cubic inch) which will lower NOx emissions so you can pass.
The ironic thing in all this is that HIGH power density is a hallmark of efficiency. It's MUCH more efficient to max out a small engine than to have a larger one loafing along.
So, in an effort to save us-- the great unwashed masses-- from ourselves, our trusty US GUVMINT is forcing less efficiency upon us.
Given the price of oil, I think this is a mistake.
jh
The Europeans value efficiency over emissions (correctly, imo), and that's why they have so many diesels. I'm not aware of any huge smog problems in Europe that are worse than the US, even with our "cleaner" cars
The 5.9 will die in those applications subject to emissions, which is an ever-dwindling category. First emissions only applied to cars, then to "light trucks" (under 8800# GVWR, i think). Now the apply even to semis, mining truck, power plants, and gas trimmers. Anything with an ICE has a good chance of being regulated.
The 6.7 is the future because of "power density" and NOx. You can make all the power you'll ever want with the 5.9 for sure-- but you can't do that AND pass emissions-- the NOx levels will be too high every time. So you have to increase displacement to decrease power density (or HP/cubic inch) which will lower NOx emissions so you can pass.
The ironic thing in all this is that HIGH power density is a hallmark of efficiency. It's MUCH more efficient to max out a small engine than to have a larger one loafing along.
So, in an effort to save us-- the great unwashed masses-- from ourselves, our trusty US GUVMINT is forcing less efficiency upon us.
Given the price of oil, I think this is a mistake.
jh
07-14-2006, 03:01 PM
#14
Chapter President
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Big Spring (now Stephenville), Tx
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Supposedly this larger engine is more fuel effecint than the 5.9. I'll believe it when I see posts to the effect of "OMG this thing got over 20mpg on the way home from the dealer".
