Any news on gas engine CUTS?

[hutchman]

The diesel Cruze vs gas Cruze was quoted from official EPA tests which I trust more than here say evidence.
The same site with figures published before gasolije prices fell and diesel stayed high was $1200 a year to drive a diesel Golf and $1050 to drive a gas Golf.
Before even paying the cost of the Golf's diesel option. Where are you saving $ with diesel? Let's hope she never needs glow plugs or injectors past warrenty .

... Ha, if you believe what the EPA says then I don't think anyone here is going to be able to help you any. And I've also got a bridge I'll sell you

I looked back at what the EPA said my cars should get and they are way conservitive. Hmmm, I wonder why EPA has optimistic estimates for gassers and conservative estimates for diesel???

Anyway, you seem like an intelligent fellow. I'm sure you know how to go to sites like fuelly.com and get answers to see if someone is really lying about their mileage etc., and what people are getting in real world numbers.

I found articles that car and driver wrote that said they got better than the EPA estimate too for my car but I doubt you'll believe them either. It would be pretty dumb as you pointed out with the "EPA" numbers you quoted to buy a diesel Golf over the gasser version. What suckers ... must be lots of stupid people out there who fell for that one ha, ha. I guess in a way you are implying that I'm bitter for making such a stupid mistake of buying the diesel Jetta vs the gas version and I'm trying to spread misinformation to sway other people to the dark side of diesel to make myself feel better.

In addition to all of the cost savings I previously mentioned, of which cost per mile is chief, my car insurance is also lower on the TDI model vs the gasser model. I'm an engineer with a touch of OCD, do you really think I haven't crunched the numbers every way possible and twice on Sunday before pulling the trigger on buying two TDI's?



"Those " DI gasoline " electronics you dread are every bit as much or more abundant on the Tier IV diesel" Actually no. As has been said other places on this site, lots of ways to meet Tier IV specs. A few sensors and some timers is all that's needed. What you proprose is more complicated and will need a full complement of computers an sensors to meet specs. If I had to, I'd take a Tier IV diesel over what you suggest any day.

Besides, your panacea DI miracle gas engine will suffer some of the same EPA challenges once the cover is blown off the biased sham they perpetuate of just how "clean" (oh, they can delay DPF's for GDI's and kick the can down the road but no, they stick it to diesel mfr's ... again no agenda there) they really are:

New DI Gasoline Engines Said to Emit 1,000 Times More Harmful Particles than Older Ones
New DI Gasoline Engines Said to Emit 1,000 Times More Harmful Particles than Older Ones

Particle Emissions from Direct Injection Gasoline Engines
GDI_ParticleEmissions.pdf

You may want to do some light bedtime reading and spend some time on Google before insulting people here any more. I told myself when I saw this thread Friday that I'd just keep quiet and behave myself but it got to the point I just couldn't take it anymore.

 

[MossRoad]

I can set the cruise control on 70MPH and the speedo needle will not budge going up Sandstone Mountain on I-64 in WV.

That's a perfect road to do this kind of test on. Been there several times. Our 2000 Impala with the 3800 and 4spd auto had to come out of OD but otherwise held its own at 70. Our 2013 Impala with the 6 speed hunts all over the place for a gear.... speeds up, upshifts, slows down, downshifts, again and again. Had to manually select 4 (as I recall) to keep it from hunting. Then it held just fine, but at fairly high RPMs. Think I was getting something like 7-8mpg up that hill. :laughing:

 

[hutchman]

Um,

For light highway vehicles. I was never alarmed if it down shifted to climb a hill.

... you might want to grasp the gravity of what I'm saying before you compare what I mentioned to a "hill". The feat I described is significant and I don't think many vehicles out there could do it so I was trying to describe the difference of driving torque vs HP. It is VERY noticable.

From Interstate 64 in West Virginia: - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"This revised interstate alignment traverses through an entirely rural area with extremely rugged terrain. Opened in 1988, this final portion is 38 miles (61 km) long and cost approximately $300 million to construct, making it one of the most expensive segments of Interstate Highway in the United States at $7.8 million per mile. It has some extremely rugged terrain, with one segment boasting a 7% grade downhill eastbound for seven miles (11 km) at Sandstone Mountain. Anticipating loss of braking situations, two emergency truck escape ramps were built to be used by runaway trucks. These emergency ramps were used with such frequency that, in addition to large warning signs alerting truckers to the steep grade, a special truck speed advisory system was installed to automatically weigh each truck and indicate the speed at which it should begin the downhill section."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc2exXYkUS0

 

[GManBart]

If you would compare apples to apples with a 4020 gas and a 4020 diesel . Where are the differces in rpm, torque and HP? There is little to none, in fact the gasser may perform slightly better.

Nebraska test 849 Deere 4020 Diesel:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 91hp and 6.4gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO speed (1000), 83.5hp and 5.6gal/hr fuel consumption.

Nebraska Test 850 Deere 4020 Gasser:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 88hp and 8.3gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO rated speed (1000), 80hp and 7.2gal/hr fuel consumption.

Yep, I can readily see how the gasser would have been a smarter choice than the diesel. :confused2:

Wait, aren't you the one against mentioning 50 year old machines?????

 

[hutchman]

Nebraska test 849 Deere 4020 Diesel:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 91hp and 6.4gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO speed (1000), 83.5hp and 5.6gal/hr fuel consumption.

Nebraska Test 850 Deere 4020 Gasser:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 88hp and 8.3gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO rated speed (1000), 80hp and 7.2gal/hr fuel consumption.

Yep, I can readily see how the gasser would have been a smarter choice than the diesel. :confused2:

Wait, aren't you the one against mentioning 50 year old machines?????

That was my thought. I mean diesel engines (and gas too) have come a long way since then but the diesel has had more innovation in particular compared to that specimen. I mean this is back when mfr's used the same blocks and components between diesel & gas engines (the diesel's weren't much higher compression than the gas version often times). I mean think of the Olds 88! We all know how sucky they were. In fact, they were so bad that's one of the reasons why diesel cars had such a up hill battle in this country because any time someone thought of a diesel car the mental image of the Olds 88 would come up! No comparison to a diesel engine that was actually designed from the ground up to be a diesel engine!

 

[buickanddeere]

... Ha, if you believe what the EPA says then I don't think anyone here is going to be able to help you any. And I've also got a bridge I'll sell you

I looked back at what the EPA said my cars should get and they are way conservitive. Hmmm, I wonder why EPA has optimistic estimates for gassers and conservative estimates for diesel???

Anyway, you seem like an intelligent fellow. I'm sure you know how to go to sites like fuelly.com and get answers to see if someone is really lying about their mileage etc., and what people are getting in real world numbers.

I found articles that car and driver wrote that said they got better than the EPA estimate too for my car but I doubt you'll believe them either. It would be pretty dumb as you pointed out with the "EPA" numbers you quoted to buy a diesel Golf over the gasser version. What suckers ... must be lots of stupid people out there who fell for that one ha, ha. I guess in a way you are implying that I'm bitter for making such a stupid mistake of buying the diesel Jetta vs the gas version and I'm trying to spread misinformation to sway other people to the dark side of diesel to make myself feel better.

In addition to all of the cost savings I previously mentioned, of which cost per mile is chief, my car insurance is also lower on the TDI model vs the gasser model. I'm an engineer with a touch of OCD, do you really think I haven't crunched the numbers every way possible and twice on Sunday before pulling the trigger on buying two TDI's?

View attachment 410038

"Those " DI gasoline " electronics you dread are every bit as much or more abundant on the Tier IV diesel" Actually no. As has been said other places on this site, lots of ways to meet Tier IV specs. A few sensors and some timers is all that's needed. What you proprose is more complicated and will need a full complement of computers an sensors to meet specs. If I had to, I'd take a Tier IV diesel over what you suggest any day.

Besides, your panacea DI miracle gas engine will suffer some of the same EPA challenges once the cover is blown off the biased sham they perpetuate of just how "clean" (oh, they can delay DPF's for GDI's and kick the can down the road but no, they stick it to diesel mfr's ... again no agenda there) they really are:

New DI Gasoline Engines Said to Emit 1,000 Times More Harmful Particles than Older Ones
New DI Gasoline Engines Said to Emit 1,000 Times More Harmful Particles than Older Ones

Particle Emissions from Direct Injection Gasoline Engines
GDI_ParticleEmissions.pdf

You may want to do some light bedtime reading and spend some time on Google before insulting people here any more. I told myself when I saw this thread Friday that I'd just keep quiet and behave myself but it got to the point I just couldn't take it anymore.

The EPA mileage tests are an even plying field to obtain and apples to apples comparison of mileage. Who should be believed about a machines performance? Lab techs using calibrated equipment under known repeatable conditions ? Or what some Bubba on the Internet or down at the tavern says his vehicle is getting for mileage?
Read up on the micro particulate the greenies have dreamed up after HC, CO, NOX and CO2 problems were solved. The EPA and the like would be out of a job if they failed to find a new crisis to regulate. Now the new "clean" combined Cycle NG generating plants placed in urban areas are polluting the air right where people live.
What controls that 30,000psi common rail injection system on that modern diesel? I would suspect a computer, yards of wiring harness, actuators and sensors.
There was once upon a time when the diesel ruled supreme in some light, most medium and all HD applications until the EPA had their way until 2007 . Now the diesel has been hamstrung and the gas has taken the lead in the light and into some medium duty applications.
Some people swear allegiance and loyalty to various ideals, corporations, institutions, teams etc. "Diesel" is one of them, it must portray some manly masculine concept or something? Why some people still stand there and defend something that WAS best in the past but has now been superseded is a mystery.
It's not 1969,1972, 1989 or 2006 any more.

 

[buickanddeere]

Um,



... you might want to grasp the gravity of what I'm saying before you compare what I mentioned to a "hill". The feat I described is significant and I don't think many vehicles out there could do it so I was trying to describe the difference of driving torque vs HP. It is VERY noticable.

From Interstate 64 in West Virginia: - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"This revised interstate alignment traverses through an entirely rural area with extremely rugged terrain. Opened in 1988, this final portion is 38 miles (61 km) long and cost approximately $300 million to construct, making it one of the most expensive segments of Interstate Highway in the United States at $7.8 million per mile. It has some extremely rugged terrain, with one segment boasting a 7% grade downhill eastbound for seven miles (11 km) at Sandstone Mountain. Anticipating loss of braking situations, two emergency truck escape ramps were built to be used by runaway trucks. These emergency ramps were used with such frequency that, in addition to large warning signs alerting truckers to the steep grade, a special truck speed advisory system was installed to automatically weigh each truck and indicate the speed at which it should begin the downhill section."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc2exXYkUS0

Highway 17 north of Sue Ste Marie has some wicked hills too.

 

[buickanddeere]

Nebraska test 849 Deere 4020 Diesel:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 91hp and 6.4gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO speed (1000), 83.5hp and 5.6gal/hr fuel consumption.

Nebraska Test 850 Deere 4020 Gasser:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 88hp and 8.3gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO rated speed (1000), 80hp and 7.2gal/hr fuel consumption.

Yep, I can readily see how the gasser would have been a smarter choice than the diesel. :confused2:

Wait, aren't you the one against mentioning 50 year old machines?????

Amazing how you so conveniently missed posting the rpm, torque and HP of the 4020 gas and diesel.
Why is it such a surprise to you and something for you to post
when I have already told you how many times how lousy the carburated gasoline engine was in the days of points distributers and when diesel 3/4 the price per gallon of gasoline. That was 50 years ago. Is this still current news to you?
Take a look on the wall, the calendar says 2015. Diesel has cost more per btu than gasoline since 2006 when ULSD was introduced. The tractors of today have Tier IV emissions equipment that you paid for up front and will pay to service after warranty runs out.
Today in light duty applications the DI gas is lower cost to purchase than diesel and has lower fuel operating costs. Cost to service that emissions equipment will cost less after warrenty expires on the simpler gas engine.

 

[MossRoad]

For the East Coast, it is a beast for sure. Lots of people have been killed on it.

First time I drove it, it was at night in a light fog.... I thought that was possibly the most uncomfortable I had ever been behind the wheel, especially on the down-hills. Only thing worse to me is Mackinac Bridge.... heebee jeebees!!!

:laughing:

 

[Gittyup]

Its because its a bigger engine to produce that same HP as the gas one. As I mentioned before, our gas IH2500b achieved very comparable results to the diesel they offered in the same tractor. But the diesel had to have about 25% higher displacement to achieve those numbers.

Don't know if mentioned, but the gasser isn't drive shaft driven to the mower deck, I don't believe and the BX is. I'm pretty sure the power transfer system to the mowers is drastically different between the two machines. Those small mowers that use a bunch of pulleys to run the deck lose most of their power in that system. Not saying that's the whole reason. The diesel still probably has more power. I just didn't see this pointed out.

I had an old gravely 10 HP tractor and that thing was unstoppable in the deepest of grasses. Why? Power delivery system. Direct motor drive to gear tranny. Shaft driven mower deck. No belts anywhere; all short/no shaft. Take that same 10 HP and put it behind a pulley system and it would be anemic. You have to be careful that you are comparing similar systems.

BTW, I think a gasser could be designed to be just as effective as diesel in a CUT/SCUT. Is there any advantage? Price? Reliability? whatever? I don't know. Maybe; maybe not. I think it would be a business loser though unless it would be significantly cheaper. And I doubt that would be the case.

 

[hutchman]

The EPA mileage tests are an even plying field to obtain and apples to apples comparison of mileage. Who should be believed about a machines performance? Lab techs using calibrated equipment under known repeatable conditions ? Or what some Bubba on the Internet or down at the tavern says his vehicle is getting for mileage?.

So testing a car on a dyno equals "Lab techs using calibrated equipment under known repeatable conditions". I guess in a way you are right. Dyno will give the same numbers for the car every time. How that translates to "real world" conditions is beyond me.

You should probably just quit because with every post you make you just further prove you don't know what you're are talking about and your added bluster of calling us "bubba", using country folk talk babble like we're a bunch of bumpkins or speculating on our "masculine"ity isn't adding to your credibility one bit.

The EPA does NOT do real world testing to determine the MPG numbers on a MSRP sticker. They take data from the mfr's and do theoretical number crunching to come up with an ESTIMATE. You might want to pick up this thing called a dictionary to see what estimate means. If the EPA did do real world testing, then why did it take them years to determine just last November that Kia and Hyundai were publishing false MPG numbers and took them to court? Yea, EPA took action to look like they are "looking out for us" but the truth is it just shows how inept the agency is (like most govt programs that just suck the life out of us by continually growing and gaining more and more power).

Go to a car lot and actually read the sticker. The EPA puts all kinds of CYA language on the sticker saying the MPG numbers are an ESTIMATE and you are not likely to get those numbers. Again, the mfr's are the ones that have all the testing equipment and do the actual testing ... the EPA just verifies the data and does some black magic to see if the mfr numbers are sane. Again, if they did real world testing they would know right away when someone is pulling the wool over our eyes.

Hey, but don't take some "bubba"'s word for it. Read about it yourself:
The Truth About EPA City / Highway MPG Estimates - Feature - Car and Driver

"But it took the EPA two years to act after fielding hundreds of complaints from Hyundai customers that the mileage they were experiencing wasn't even coming close to the official EPA estimates posted on the vehicles when they were on the dealers' lots.

For many, the explanation of what happened was an eye-opening look at how the system works: The EPA establishes the tests that yield the fuel economy figures, but for the most part it doesn't conduct the tests itself. It doesn't have the budget, equipment or manpower to test the hundreds of individual models with unique engine and transmission combinations that automakers produce each year." Here's Why Real-World MPG Doesn't Match EPA Ratings

Again, there are these things called search engines like Google that will help straighten you out on all this stuff.

Some people swear allegiance and loyalty to various ideals, corporations, institutions, teams etc. "Diesel" is one of them, it must portray some manly masculine concept or something? Why some people still stand there and defend something that WAS best in the past but has now been superseded is a mystery.
It's not 1969,1972, 1989 or 2006 any more."

If you took the time to read the GDI info I laid out before you you would know that it is YOU that is being a fanboy for a technology that is facing more problems than today's modern diesel. And my tractor is a 2012 thank you. Just because Tier IV is the current thing doesn't make everything that came before it instantly crap.

And finally, I'll add in a personal story for free. When I was a young boy in Michigan, my dad had a few VW beetles he kept and always worked on because they did so well in the deep snow we used to get. I hated them. They stank, sounded funny, heaters didn't work, you had to have a roll of paper towels to wipe the inside of the windshield to see where you were going because the defrosters didn't work for crap. My family worked for Ford in Detroit. I get A plan pricing on Fords still to this day. I still have a F-150 but it isn't my daily driver. It took me a LONG time to warm up to the idea of ME driving a VW anything vs an American made car (my grandpa would probably roll over in his grave if he knew I had two German and one Japan car in my driveway). But I got tired of being taken for rides buying American cars. I'd buy one, it would have problems, I'd try to get dealer to fix them, they blow you off until warranty is out ... by the time you realize you have a piece of crap you can't sell it for anything because it depreciated so much. Started observing my peers in the same situation (military members driving crazy miles) as me and what they were commuting in and what their operating costs were. Discovered TDIClub and took in all the info I could educating myself. When I determined there really was something to this "TDI diesel" thing I bought a TDI. Was so impressed I bought another. They aren't perfect, all vehicles have flaws ... they are man made after all. But with some education and a little determination and the resources I've mentioned before, I've been able to keep both running over 10 years with minimal expense and even though you don't believe it have saved me money in fuel bills compared to what I was paying before when gassers were my daily driver. They get the same or better MPG's then when I first got them. My wife and kids run around in a 5 star crash safety rated TDI with 14 airbags. There are videos on YouTube of them being involved in high speed front end crashes where they are totally unrecogniseable and the occupants walked away. I know one person that was in two offset head on crashes with one and was unhurt both times when police, EMS etc. said they should be dead. After the first crash they were so impressed with the performance they bought another just like it (gasser mind you but the same car).

So I'm not loyal to any idea, corp. or institution. I know how to think for myself and research and pick what works.

I've said my piece and backed it up with facts and not babble. I'm done now. Let me know when you get your GDI tractor. I'll probably be dead and gone by then.

 

[MossRoad]

Highway 17 north of Sue Ste Marie has some wicked hills too.

Been there, drove that, NOT EVEN CLOSE! :laughing:

 

[sd455dan]

Nebraska test 849 Deere 4020 Diesel:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 91hp and 6.4gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO speed (1000), 83.5hp and 5.6gal/hr fuel consumption.

Nebraska Test 850 Deere 4020 Gasser:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 88hp and 8.3gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO rated speed (1000), 80hp and 7.2gal/hr fuel consumption.

Yep, I can readily see how the gasser would have been a smarter choice than the diesel. :confused2:

Wait, aren't you the one against mentioning 50 year old machines?????

Yeah that got me thinking of the ford Gas -diesel comparisons like the early Ford 2000 series with the 158 gas and diesel engine.

diesel pto hp 32.09hp gas 30.85 hp
draw bar hp diesel 28.10hp gas 26.49hp

Fuel consumption Gas 10.79 horsepower-hours per gallon


diesel 14.23 horsepower-hours per gallon


Major difference in fuel operating cost...

 

[aczlan]

Nebraska test 849 Deere 4020 Diesel:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 91hp and 6.4gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO speed (1000), 83.5hp and 5.6gal/hr fuel consumption.

Nebraska Test 850 Deere 4020 Gasser:

At engine rated speed (2,200rpm), 88hp and 8.3gal/hr fuel consumption.
At PTO rated speed (1000), 80hp and 7.2gal/hr fuel consumption.
Yep, I can readily see how the gasser would have been a smarter choice than the diesel. :confused2:
Wait, aren't you the one against mentioning 50 year old machines?????

Well, with last weeks gas prices (from U.S. Gasoline and Diesel Retail Prices $2.068/Gal for Regular Gas and $2.831 for ULSD), it would cost the following per hour to run those tractors at PTO rpms and engine rated rpms:

Tractor	Engine RPMs	PTO RPMs
Diesel	$18.12	$15.85
Gas	$17.16	$14.89

As such, last week the gas tractor would be cheaper per hour to run than the Diesel one .

Aaron Z

 

[hutchman]

In the summer the picture will be different because we are in the winter season now and diesel costs more because it competes with other products around the same level on the distillation tower (home heating oil, kerosene etc.)

And if you pay attention to the GDI articles I posted, this is the calm before the storm for gasoline. GDI's can't meet emission standards and are killing us at 10x the level of diesel but nobody knows it. The specs got kicked down the road til 2017 or something like that but gasser will look an awful lot like diesels with DPF's to meet specs. and Ethanol doesn't help the situation at all.

Diesel fuel and engines have already been through this churn. Now it's the gassers turn!

 

[hutchman]

I like some of the comments here:
TUV Nord Testing Firm: Direct Injected Gasoline Engines Emit More Particulates Than Diesels - The Truth About Cars

'$68 dollars and nirvana thereafter is just an environmental zealot version of “if you like your health care plan you can keep it.”'

 

[aczlan]

In the summer the picture will be different because we are in the winter season now and diesel costs more because it competes with other products around the same level on the distillation tower (home heating oil, kerosene etc.)

And if you pay attention to the GDI articles I posted, this is the calm before the storm for gasoline. GDI's can't meet emission standards and are killing us at 10x the level of diesel but nobody knows it. The specs got kicked down the road til 2017 or something like that but gasser will look an awful lot like diesels with DPF's to meet specs. and Ethanol doesn't help the situation at all.
Diesel fuel and engines have already been through this churn. Now it's the gassers turn!

Actually, per this article: Will GDI engines mean higher particulate emissions? Thanks to already-enacted Tier 3 standards, no | International Council on Clean Transportation Ethanol helps by adding more oxygen during the combustion process and using a different injector spray pattern could take care of this problem.

Aaron Z

 

[hutchman]

Actually, per this article: Will GDI engines mean higher particulate emissions? Thanks to already-enacted Tier 3 standards, no | International Council on Clean Transportation Ethanol helps by adding more oxygen during the combustion process and using a different injector spray pattern could take care of this problem.



Aaron Z

That's a little different than most articles I found that appear to be published a month or two after that. Who knows. Sounds like new emission standards are coming from everything I read. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it all shakes out. This news appears to be more tamped down than the diesel changes. I never heard of some of these before.


Update. As I was. The article you posted is newer than the ones I posted so it may be more accurate. I was thinking one was from end of 2014.

 

[hutchman]

Found this one. March 2014. References some of the same study I mentioned before. Still says tuning isn't enough and a GPF will be needed.

Engine Technology International - March 2014

This from June 2014 Green Car Congress: Environment Canada/MECA team assesses black carbon emissions in GDI engine exhaust; evaluation of prototype gasoline particulate filter