If all this is true, its about time ford brings a diesel to north america.
Ford's sat on their arse for 15 years, its about time they "just do
something" and stick themselves out there. This is finally something
Toyota may need to catch up to...
And if those Ford Raptor plans are true, one more iron in the fire for ford.
Yes but the way I figure it is that I have an Aerostar with a 4 banger that
gets 18 to 20 mpg. At $3.00 a gallon I get just under 7 miles a dollor.At
that rate if I get better than 27 mpg with a diesel ,I am ahead of the
game.A 4.4l Diesel I would think would get much better than that.
add to that that the money hungry oil bastards have not reached the $10 per
gallon price they want for diesel, and you will fing no one will buy the
small diesel trucks anyway, so ford will never make them.
I wouldn't be counting chickens that haven't hatched yet... Diesel fuel
mileage isn't all that great these days as the engines have a lot of
emissions controls of their own to contend with. The next round of clean air
requirements is slated to happen for the 2010 model year..
Manufacturers are experimenting with urea injection... This is injected into
the exhaust system and, in conjunction with SCR catalyst (selective
catalytic reduction) may help to gain back some of that lost power... but
there will still be smoke and exhaust opacity to contend with.
Yes I saw that urea injection mentioned, i thought it was purely an
emissions thing? The article mentioned it would be filled in the
current fill neck area once per oil change.
So is it emissions or fuel efficiency?
I particularly liked the statement on the poster (an inside ford
poster?) that stated one of the advantages of the urea is:
"-stocked at dealerships"
"-gets customers returning to the dealership"
The amount of urea used would actually depend on how the motor was
driven.... Light duty use with low combustion temps would hardly any at
all... "spirited" driving or heavy loads would increase the amount of
ammonia injected into the exhaust.
Yes... it is entirely an emissions thing. However, keeping combustion temps
low is the current way of eliminating oxides of nitrogen.... With urea
injection and the SRC, they can allow the formation of NOx and then deal
with it in the exhaust aftertreatments.
Of course there will still be smoke and particulate emissions to contend
One of the other benefits of diesel is that it isn't really classified as an
"aromatic" and currently doesn't require an evaporative emissions system.
Ford has had that V6 diesel in the parts bin for at least four years.
Navistar (International) built a Ford specific engine plant to build it and
the Power Stroke V8, but Ford waited until the new cleaner burning diesel
fuel was available county wide to offer the six. VW will be bringing in
several of its diesel cars to the US as well now, for the same reason. The
problem is the cleaner burning diesel cast more to produce and is thus now
more expensive than gasoline but the diesel will get better fuel mileage to
The only time we well ever see sensible fuel price again is when the feds
get off their stupid asses and start drilling the vast oil reserves we have
off our shores and in Alaska. Better start writing to your Senators and
Congressmen TODAY, WBMA
Navistar (International) built a Ford specific engine
new cleaner burning diesel fuel was available county wide
to the US as well now, for the same reason. The problem
more expensive than gasoline but the diesel will get better
feds get off their stupid asses and start drilling the vast
writing to your Senators and Congressmen TODAY, WBMA
the early '70s.
The problem isn't the supply of crude. Reserves today are greater than in
the seventies. It's refining capacity. I don't believe there has been a
refinery built in North America since the late sixties or early seventies.
It's the NIMBY thing.
No, it's mostly Crocodile Tears - the owners of the existing
refineries want the competition restricted, they don't propose any of
their own and stop the construction of other new refineries to control
the inventories of refined products.
Oil refineries buy crude oil low and sell refined products high, and
the difference is called the "Crack Spread". Part of that goes to
cover costs, the rest is pure profit - go look at any oil companies
quarterly reports and stock prices.
NIMBY protests against new refineries that look "Grass Roots" can
turn out to be "Astroturf" if the protests are bought and paid for by
another oil company.
The oil companies manage to keep expanding their existing old
refineries just enough to ALMOST keep up with market demand, when they
can keep the reserves of refined product very short that pushes the
market prices as high as they can.
Shell tried to close down their former Martinez CA refinery because
"it was old and technologically handicapped and way too dirty to
operate", and it "can only refine heavy crude into industrial products
that we can make cleaner and cheaper elsewhere" - but they failed to
mention in their filings that it also conveniently enough makes ~8% of
the Diesel used in California. That would have really jacked up the
Diesel Fuel market...
The feds forced them to keep it operating, and it was sold as a
running refinery to Flying J Truck Stops - for whom it is still
happily chugging away making diesel.
And when the pump prices need an extra boost, someone leaves a valve
cracked and drops a lit match, and "Oops!" they have a refinery fire.
Or they shutdown a week for upgrades and changing from Winter to
Summer Blend. The 'panic in the wholesale market' from these short
shutdowns is always good for a 10-cent kick in pump prices.
--<< Bruce >>--
That may be your opinion, but you are a bit off if that is what you believe.
Oil companies are indeed building new refineries, but they are building them
where they can be built at a reasonable cost and that is outside the US.
It is far less expensive to build off shore and simply import the refined
products, all with out running afoul of or over restrictive environmental
As too who makes the most on every gallon of the fuel you buy at the pump?
That would be your state government at an average of around thirty seven
cents. Who come next to pick you pocket? The federal government, at
eighteen and half cents and 24c on diesel fuel. THEN comes the oil company,
that had to invest BILLIONS to get the crude oil to make the gasoline, at
around 16c. Lastly the sap that owns the station, he gets what he got
thirty years ago, around seven cents. About half of what he gets on a pack
of gun, but still far less than the 30c he earns on a bottle of water, IF he
is lucky enough to get you to come inside
That is one of the problems, but the real problem in current environmental
laws that have made it almost if not impossible to build new refiners,
storage or transporting facilities in the US. Our Senators and Congressmen
are too afraid of the "Environuts" to do what is right for the country.
We are ALL environmentalist, in that we do not what to poop where we eat,
today unfortunately the Environuts are taking over the county the folks that
do not want us to "eat" so we do not have to deal with the "poop."
The good Lord made crude oil and he made it dirty. We should have
reasonable laws that makes one clean it up if we spill some, but should not
have laws that virtually make it unusable
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.