EPA Diesel Engine “Delete Tuning” Crackdown...Is It Here Now?

[MOguy]

MOguy. None of your links are working. They just bring up the google generic search page.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They link to google searches with links to the topics. This way you can have more than one source for you information.

If not do your own searches. If I post just one it will be bias, you need multiple options to be informed.

 

[Bayou Boy]

They link to google searches with links to the topics. This way you can have more than one source for you information.

If not do your own searches. If I post just one it will be bias, you need multiple options to be informed.

They work on desktop. They were redirecting to google.com on Tapatalk.

 

[MOguy]

They work on desktop. They were redirecting to google.com on Tapatalk.

Tapatalkers will have to do their own google searches if interested.

 

[plumber mike]

In my experience, it's easier to switch off an engine than to switch off people, so yes, blaming diesel emissions makes sense.

Not switch off. Just install filters front and back on the new ones ;-)

 

[Highlander]

This sentiment is unique to USA and USA alone. Everywhere else in the world, diesels are preferred for trucks and 4x4’s over gasoline...it’s not even close.

I just finished driving a diesel Hilux several thousand km’s around southern Africa; the driving experience and range was so much better than anything by a gasoline Tacoma or Ranger would have offered. The low torque makes driving over rough roads a breeze and the range meant that I didn’t have to fret over fuel stops.

Americans have come to think of diesels as useful only for towing big loads, but that’s a mindset born out of ignorance. The reality is that any moderately built up 4x4 or truck, big or small, handles itself much better with a diesel. Only exception might come down to highway passing, but that really comes down to knowing your vehicle’s optimal rpm range.

7.3l v8 by Ford is nothing special...sure it will have decent torque, as do any number of other gasser v8’s, but fuel economy will be mediocre at best. It’s laughable to suggest that someone is going to be more eco friendly buying a gas guzzling v8 instead of an emissions intact diesel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are not wrong. In fact I myself drove a Mitsubishi L200 in Alps and as yourself I was impressed with the overall performance and mpg. We had 4 people in the cabin, gear, bags, and 3 dogs... and it still gave us good mpg. 8.5 L/100 km which is roughly equals 28.mpg. Given the fact half of the drive was in mountains it is not bad at all.

However, when it comes to HD trucks with massive 6+ liter Diesel engines, with unreported fuel economy numbers, and with usually expansive maintenance, are they any better than gas trucks?
The low end torque is great, but gas engines are not remarkably behind.
And also keep in mind the price of a diesel truck vs gas.

I was looking at an extended cub Ford F-250 with an FX4 package and -100k mileage.
The gas ones are at least 8k cheaper and in far better shape.
I think this is why an average American overlander sticks with gas powered vehicles.

 

[Dalko43]

You are not wrong. In fact I myself drove a Mitsubishi L200 in Alps and as yourself I was impressed with the overall performance and mpg. We had 4 people in the cabin, gear, bags, and 3 dogs... and it still gave us good mpg. 8.5 L/100 km which is roughly equals 28.mpg. Given the fact half of the drive was in mountains it is not bad at all.

However, when it comes to HD trucks with massive 6+ liter Diesel engines, with unreported fuel economy numbers, and with usually expansive maintenance, are they any better than gas trucks?
The low end torque is great, but gas engines are not remarkably behind.
And also keep in mind the price of a diesel truck vs gas.

This is true, but keep in mind that the HD diesel engines are not tuned for mpg, they are tuned for outright performance and towing capability...the torque and hp numbers put them in an entirely different league from what the gasoline engines are in for that segment.

I was looking at an extended cub Ford F-250 with an FX4 package and -100k mileage.
The gas ones are at least 8k cheaper and in far better shape.
I think this is why an average American overlander sticks with gas powered vehicles.

The avg overlander sticks to gasoline because, until recently, that was the only real option available (outside of the HD segment). If I were going to pick up a HD for carrying a camper or hauling a heavy load, I still think diesel makes more sense (even if the mpg advantage is marginal)...more fuel tank options, better torque/grunt, better resale value and engine longevity (especially for working applications).

Within the 1/2 ton and midsized segments, I'm really not all that impressed with what I've seen. 2.8l duramax and 3.0l duramax seem like decent engines, but the Colorado and Silverado platforms makes me nervous. FCA and Ford are essentially borrowing passenger car engines for their 1/2 ton trucks.

 

[kahos]

Within the 1/2 ton and midsized segments, I'm really not all that impressed with what I've seen. 2.8l duramax and 3.0l duramax seem like decent engines, but the Colorado and Silverado platforms makes me nervous. FCA and Ford are essentially borrowing passenger car engines for their 1/2 ton trucks.

I've owned the 3.0 Ecodiesel and 2.8 Duramax. The difference in power and refinement between the 4 and 6 cyl is night and day. The diesel chatter does have some appeal at times, but there is such a thing as "too much"It sounds like a farm implement on a cold start in sub zero temperatures, which gets old rather quick. It feels like beyond the lack of HP, the 2.8's overall driveability is held back by the older 6 speed in the colorado. They offer the 8 speed in the vans, I'd be curious to know why they don't in the colorado twins. Packaging concerns? Cost concerns?

With Ford's diesel max towing numbers not being held back by thermal constraints like Ram's first gen ecodiesel, I'm surprised at how "poorly" it has performed in early reviews. Post Vw diesel gate market? Offering it on top trim levels only priced it out of reach for many and the benefits over the ecoboost are unclear. Car motor with timing belt? Meh.

The new GM 3.0 inline six sounds like a winner. It's not suited to my current driving conditions but I hope it does well. GM's pricing on the new generation isn't all that appealing however.

I've been a diesel fan but I may never return to the light duty market. I've been quite impressed with the Ford 2.7TT. Not as efficient, but gas makes for a worry free ownership experience by comparison. The availability of a 35% larger fuel tank on the ford makes for a satisfactory long distance cruiser.

 

[Highlander]

This is true, but keep in mind that the HD diesel engines are not tuned for mpg, they are tuned for outright performance and towing capability...the torque and hp numbers put them in an entirely different league from what the gasoline engines are in for that segment.

Yes, that is the problem. In HD segment the big three are fighting over who’s got better low end torque... and guess what they all do. 800+ torque at 1500rp is good enough, but they are keep pushing it meanwhile the actual mpg is unavailable. They all have the data somewhere but they don’t publish it.
Do you have any reason to believe the big three ever will be interested in making HD mpg official?

Colorado and Silverado platforms makes me nervous.

Why?
Can you elaborate?

Also I forgot to mention that American trucks are designed more to tow and less to carry in bad as opposed to Australian and European trucks where the case is other way around. This requires tow different architecture of the truck.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Yes, that is the problem. In HD segment the big three are fighting over who’s got better low end torque... and guess what they all do. 800+ torque at 1500rp is good enough, but they are keep pushing it meanwhile the actual mpg is unavailable. They all have the data somewhere but they don’t publish it.
Do you have any reason to believe the big three ever will be interested in making HD mpg official?

I don't think they would publish anything of the govt didn't tell them to.

 

[Joe917]

Of course it's easier to blame the diesel, "scientists" say so.... funny thing about "scientists" in the 70's and early 80's all we heard was "impending ice age" due to humans, then they discovered a variable that they missed and now it's "global warming" due to humans, what are they going to discover in 5 to 10 years that changes their narrative?

"Scientists" don't have all the correct input to reach the correct answer so they are continuing to change their opinions, so why should we believe their interpretation now as some here keep trying force everybody to accept? Sheep, that's why...

All you heard was "Impending ice age" because that is what you wanted to hear. It made an eye catching cover for Time magazine. Science in the 70's predicted warming.

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1

In the 70s, they said there'd be an Ice Age | NOAA Climate.gov

This is a video overview of the history of climate science, with the goal of debunking the idea that in the 1970s, climate scientists were predicting global cooling.

www.climate.gov

Manipulated Time Cover on Climate Recirculates - FactCheck.org

A viral meme attempts to undercut the evidence of climate change by using an edited cover of Time magazine -- and regurgitating a misleading claim about "global cooling."

www.factcheck.org

 

[Deleted member 9101]

I've been a diesel fan but I may never return to the light duty market. I've been quite impressed with the Ford 2.7TT. Not as efficient, but gas makes for a worry free ownership experience by comparison.

I have the 2.7 EcoBoost and absolitely love it. It requires no special maintaince and for a modern engine it's easy to work on. While the 3.0 diesel gets better fuel economy, when everything is added in the mix the 2.7 is no more expensive per mile to drive and cost less to buy and insure. I have no problem getting 24-25 mpg doing 70 mph using 87 octane fuel.

 

[Regcabguy]

My next truck might be an F-150 Supercab and the shortbed. That 2.7 TT is looking fine.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

My next truck might be an F-150 Supercab and the shortbed. That 2.7 TT is looking fine.

The 2.7 is an amazing engine and shocks you the first time you drive one and lay into the throttle. They also don't have the cam phaser problems associated with the 3.5.

 

[phsycle]

they are keep pushing it meanwhile the actual mpg is unavailable. They all have the data somewhere but they don’t publish it.
Do you have any reason to believe the big three ever will be interested in making HD mpg official?

Who cares? EPA rating is garbage anyway. Numbers based on trucks running in ideal conditions—no hills, constant speed, for 10 miles, all at 50mph. Real world numbers would be drastically different, especially for HD trucks. Just rent one for a weekend, if you can.

 

[NevadaLover]

All you heard was "Impending ice age" because that is what you wanted to hear. It made an eye catching cover for Time magazine. Science in the 70's predicted warming.

Really... that's what I wanted to hear?
as a preteen in grade and junior high school in the 70's I didn't give one ******** about anything related to the environment, that was being taught in school and that was what we heard, you can believe whatever you want but as a kid that's what was taught in science, impending ice age.....
You can spout all the vomit you want and post link after link of whatever **************** you like the flavor of today, I lived it in the 70's and none of your garbage or your crybaby "it never happened" website garbage is going to change the fact that we were taught "impending ice age" doom and gloom!