Ford (F) will keep its eyes on the diesel market and react quickly if demand picks up, according...

Ford (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.

From other sites
Comments (10)
  • Tdot
    , contributor
    Comments (8652) | Send Message
    Ford has a fine line of small diesel powertrains available in Europe (and elsewhere in the world), where they and the fuel are heavily subsidized relative to gasoline burners. Ford can bring them to the US in very short order, if there is demand for them and profits to be made. Diesels are notoriously more expensive in the US, and the fuel isn't significantly cheaper even with the ~25% boost in fuel efficiency, so most folks in the US buy them as a premium regardless of the economics


    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.
    12 Feb 2013, 07:56 AM Reply Like
  • whitgallman
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
    The Big 3 plus Toyota are missing a lot of sales by not offering a small turbo diesel in pickup trucks.
    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.
    12 Feb 2013, 07:58 AM Reply Like
  • panheadpj
    , contributor
    Comments (11) | Send Message
    You hit the nail on the head,i need a pick-up that isn't as big as God-zilla that can pull my race car yet get some fuel economy when not pulling.
    12 Feb 2013, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • Tommyk27
    , contributor
    Comments (6) | Send Message
    Will it be nat gas...will it be "clean diesel'...will it be hybrid....will it be full electric? Makes it hard to pick the car or the stock for the future.
    12 Feb 2013, 07:59 AM Reply Like
  • gflatt
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
    Sadly, about 10 years "Late"! It will be a up hill battle, one they should of engaged in many years, and many "Regulations" ago.
    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.
    12 Feb 2013, 08:24 AM Reply Like
  • chudzikb
    , contributor
    Comments (1943) | Send Message
    Ford please bring us a diesel Focus or Fusion, pretty please? I have owned VW diesels since 98, older ones last forever, a bit weary of new designs due to pump issues caused by less than stellar U.S. fuel.
    12 Feb 2013, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • flumeride
    , contributor
    Comments (467) | Send Message
    I'd rather see them develop CNG power trains. We have an abundance of nat gas here in the US, in Russia and Australia. I believe that other sources will come online as well. CNG burns more clean than gasoline or diesel as well.
    12 Feb 2013, 01:51 PM Reply Like
  • Tdot
    , contributor
    Comments (8652) | Send Message
    There is nothing to a CNG powertrain - it is the standard otto-cycle internal combustion engine such as is used with gasoline. A standard gasoline engine is perfectly suitable - it just needs a CNG-compatible fuel system. Most CNG vehicles on the road use a simple standard gasoline IC engine with a valve to switch from the gasoline tank to the CNG tank and back. The onboard computers and sensors work out the combustion timing details and air/fuel ratio for optimum near-stoichiometric operation.


    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.
    12 Feb 2013, 07:21 PM Reply Like
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
    The Diesel needs to be considered as a dual fuel engine. I believe all Diesels sold in the US now use a 'catalyst' to feed the anti-pollution exhaust system. This applies to small engines used in pick-ups as well as those in engines up to 15 litres used in tractors for tractor-trailer trucks. The cost of the additive is small compared with the fuel used, but definitely a nuisance for the small vehicle owner. If the 'catalyst' supply runs empty, the engine shuts down.
    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.
    13 Feb 2013, 03:40 PM Reply Like
  • Tdot
    , contributor
    Comments (8652) | Send Message
    Nonsense. The Big Three are in business to make money. They have no desire to lose money trying to sell expensive diesel powertrains to 99% of folks that don't seem to want them at this time.


    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."

    13 Feb 2013, 05:33 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs