Market Currents
Ford (F) will keep its eyes on the diesel market and react quickly if demand picks up, according...
-
Tuesday, February 12, 7:01 AM ETFord (F) will keep its eyes on the diesel market and react quickly if demand picks up, according to execs. Last week, diesel was all the rage at the Chicago Auto Show with a number of automakers saying they will increase their presence this year in the U.S. market for diesel-powered vehicles.
Other date
Latest Consumer Articles
This news story has 10 comments:
Volkswagen currently "owns" the US market for diesels in cars and crossovers, with just under 80% of the total. But it is still a very small market to be in - covering less than 0.87% of total vehicle sales 2012. To be fair, the US diesel market is up from 0.80% in 2011, but it significantly trails behind Hybrids in the US at 3.01%, which is also up from 2.11% in 2011.
They need a 2.5 liter turbo diesel and a 5 or 6 speed tranny (double overdrive) that can put out 160 hp and 340 ft-lb torque.
No one has one because of the EPA.
My ’06 Jeep Liberty with a 2.8 L turbo diesel has gotten 36 mpg highway (on board fuel economy gauge). It has 160 hp and 300 ft-lb torque.
The designers at the big auto makers get free fuel so they don’t understand the need to strive for increased fuel economy.
The modern highly refined piston diesel engine is a maintenance nightmare with the never ending parasitic add-on's in the quest to be cleaner than the gasoline engine. Being 30% more efficient, just isn't enough for them. And the quality of the fuel supplied in the US is not conducive to longevity in the high pressure, high burn environment. I've been driving a diesel pick-up sense "84" , my wife drives a diesel car, we have a 15K diesel generator, solid older technology.
With CNG being a simple hydrocarbon, mostly methane CH4, and virtually no sulfur and other stuff, the combustion products are mostly harmless CO2 and H2O - there is not much involvement of atmospheric N2.
Re the efficiency of the Diesel vs an Otto-cycle engine, I believe the:
"... 25% boost in fuel efficiency ..." mentioned by 'Tdot' and,
"... being 30% more efficient just isn't enough . . . " mentioned by 'gflatt' are gross understatements for overall fuel economy offered by the Diesel over the Otto.
In vehicular use, the Otto is bad due to terrible efficiency at partial throttle, which is most of the time. Until about 2008, automotive journalists would occasionally mention that the gasoline engine provides an overall efficiency of 20%. Efficiency numbers for gasoline fueled engines are rarely printed in English.
Circa 2011-2012, one of the major manufacturers for Diesel engines for tractor trailer trucks published an ad for their new engine that claimed 48% efficiency. Combine that with the fact that Diesel engines do not degrade much in efficiency at partial throttle, and the Diesel does far better than 25 to 30% efficiency improvement over the Otto. My opinion, after having spent much of my lifetime studying engine efficiency, is that the Diesel provides 70 to 90% improvement in fuel economy over the Otto, when used in a vehicle under stop and go and partial throttle driving conditions.
I don't believe the Big Three really want to offer Diesel engines to the passenger car market in the US, in spite of their wide market share in Europe.
In Europe, diesel engines and fuel are heavily subsidized, and petrol engines and gasoline are heavily taxed, and diesel emissions regulations are much looser, so the market is essentially forced to a "wide market share" in Europe. The money talks!
If The Regime wishes to do the same in the US, subsidizing and encouraging diesels, taxing gasoline and Otto Cycle engines, and loosening up the onerous regulations on diesels, then The Big Three will introduce and market the same small turbodiesels in the US, faster than you can say "The Diesel cycle is more efficient than Otto cycle for the condition of same maximum pressure and heat input, while the efficiency of the Otto cycle is greater than the efficiency of the Diesel cycle for a given compression ratio and heat rejection."
http://bit.ly/ZbcAyt