Any news on gas engine CUTS?

[GManBart]

Torque requirements ? A natural aspirated gasser tractor engine has more torque per cubic inch than a diesel per cubic inch. Look at the JD 4020 specs for example . A lot of fuel? A modern direct injection gassed use a lot of fuel? Have you looked at the part load fuel consumption of Diesel engines .

We're talking about modern CUTs and SCUTs, not 45 year old 100hp Utility tractors.

 

[GManBart]

We have people here who do not understand the difference between light duty applications and heavy duty applications . Nor are they aware of direct injection gasoline engines, tied IV diesel emissions and glow plugs, 30,000psi injectors or pumps, egr valves, egr coolers , urea injection , particulate filter regeneration . They are thinking of carbureted gas engines with points vs an inline diesel with just a P pump and a turbo. With diesel costing 3/4 the price of gasoline .
A DI gasser will make just as much power per btu of fuel than a diesel.
Part throttle, part load applications a gasser absolutely stomps all over a diesel's part load efficiency . That is why they are used in light highway vehicles.

Yes, you've repeatedly said compact tractors have light duty cycle engines, which is false...glad to see that clarified.

Last I knew, you haven't been able to provide any facts, much less data, from a direct injection gas engine used in a tractor, or one that would be suitable for such use, so you're either guessing or stating an opinion,but representing it as a fact.

The best Diesel engines are more efficient than the most efficient gas engines....period. Now that diesel is back to being the same price, or cheaper in most markets, the issue isn't all that complicated.

More efficient, with similar, or lower cost fuel means nobody is going to waste money building a gasser engine for a CUT or SCUT because it doesn't make sense. Then again, some folks here think they know more about this than the tractor manufacturers do...lol!

 

[hutchman]

Yes, you've repeatedly said compact tractors have light duty cycle engines, which is false...glad to see that clarified.

Last I knew, you haven't been able to provide any facts, much less data, from a direct injection gas engine used in a tractor, or one that would be suitable for such use, so you're either guessing or stating an opinion,but representing it as a fact.

The best Diesel engines are more efficient than the most efficient gas engines....period. Now that diesel is back to being the same price, or cheaper in most markets, the issue isn't all that complicated.

More efficient, with similar, or lower cost fuel means nobody is going to waste money building a gasser engine for a CUT or SCUT because it doesn't make sense. Then again, some folks here think they know more about this than the tractor manufacturers do...lol!

... and ignoring the fact GDI (high efficiency gas engines) produce finer particulates (aka - worse on lungs than diesel particulate) and are subject to upcoming stricter EPA emission regs ... the outcome will be gas & diesel engines will both be wearing similar emissions technology (which will narrow the price gap between the two). GDI's are where TDI's used to be back in 1986.

 

[AxleHub]

Are you living in 1975 or 2015 ?

Its not I talking probabilities.

You claim gas and diesel can be hoghly competitive in torque and constant power demand for the same size. But your facts don't demonstrate your claims.

So lets use as close an example as I can draw.

Kubota makes 2 commercial quality riding tractors a 20 hp gr2020 gas and a 21 hp gr2120 diesel. Same size of frame . . 1 hp different in size. Both new very current technology engines.

Yet the gr2020 can only support a 48 inch deck while the gr2120 supports a 48 or 54 inch deck. Both are 4wd. The gr2120 produces more torque and a higher duty cycle . . . hence the 48 AND 54 inch deck options.

My point is . . . Your post are theoretical . . Not historically factual.

Now my Massey GC1715 is tier 4 already and the fuel consumption and power are both far far far better than I was prepared for or expecting. I expected a 25% fuel reduction for the same job . . . and I'm at about 50% fuel reduction compared to a current gas engine of similar size.

 

[mo1]

The GR2120's engine has 25% more displacement- 778 cc vs. 624 cc. I would absolutely expect the 25% larger displacement engine to have more torque and be able to do more work. A gasoline engine with a similar displacement as the diesel would be a better match, such as Kohler's ECV749, which is a 749 cc EFI straight twin with 9.1:1 compression that makes 26.5 hp.

 

[AxleHub]

The GR2120's engine has 25% more displacement- 778 cc vs. 624 cc. I would absolutely expect the 25% larger displacement engine to have more torque and be able to do more work. A gasoline engine with a similar displacement as the diesel would be a better match, such as Kohler's ECV749, which is a 749 cc EFI straight twin with 9.1:1 compression that makes 26.5 hp.

But if the fuel efficiency of the GR2120 is ALREADY considerably better than the GR2020 . . . Imagine what it would be compared to the ECV749 engine.

Gas engines are superior to diesel engines when speed is the goal . . which is why cars, outboards, motorcycles, atvs and small engines are gas. But IMO when power is the goal and long term durability under power draw . . Diesel has the advantage and a considerable fuel efficiency improvement over gas. Thats why tractors, construction equopment, semi and hauling trucks of all sizes are diesel. Speed and weight versus power, efficiency, and durability.

 

[buickanddeere]

... and ignoring the fact GDI (high efficiency gas engines) produce finer particulates (aka - worse on lungs than diesel particulate) and are subject to upcoming stricter EPA emission regs ... the outcome will be gas & diesel engines will both be wearing similar emissions technology (which will narrow the price gap between the two). GDI's are where TDI's used to be back in 1986.

The upcoming regs by the EPA do-gooders as you said will impact anything that resembles a machine and burns some sort of fuel. The average Joe puttzing around with their side by side ATV, SCUT, CUT, residential lawn mower etc in light duty service will be better served with a DI gasser. The lighter gasoline with a higher ratio of hydrogen vs carbon compared to diesel fuel will make CO2 compliance easier.
No question in high powered heavy duty service the diesel does still win. In 1972 when there was absolutely no contest between the gas and diesel. However in 2015 the DI gasser has narrowed the gap over the Tier IV diesel. Shudder to think the $$$ required to keep an aging Tier IV diesel compliant.
Still some people see only gas vs diesel and compare a 1972 gasser with a 2006 diesel. It's 2015 and there is a such a thing as light duty and heavy duty service.
If the whole world had to meet Tier IV diesel and the whole world had to pay more per gallon for diesel than gasoline. Vehicles and equipment would look much different.
It's a world market but many folk forget to look past the closest border.

 

[GManBart]

The upcoming regs by the EPA do-gooders as you said will impact anything that resembles a machine and burns some sort of fuel. The average Joe puttzing around with their side by side ATV, SCUT, CUT, residential lawn mower etc in light duty service will be better served with a DI gasser.

I don't know why you insist on repeating this fallacy. Many people running SCUTs and CUTs are running at PTO speed for hours on end. That is not a light-duty cycle any way, shape or form...unless someone is biased and trying to win a debate with false "facts" which are really opinions, and preconceived notions.

No question in high powered heavy duty service the diesel does still win. In 1972 when there was absolutely no contest between the gas and diesel. However in 2015 the DI gasser has narrowed the gap over the Tier IV diesel. Shudder to think the $$$ required to keep an aging Tier IV diesel compliant.
Still some people see only gas vs diesel and compare a 1972 gasser with a 2006 diesel. It's 2015 and there is a such a thing as light duty and heavy duty service.
If the whole world had to meet Tier IV diesel and the whole world had to pay more per gallon for diesel than gasoline. Vehicles and equipment would look much different.
It's a world market but many folk forget to look past the closest border.

First off, Tier IV has no bearing upon the efficiency of the engine. It changes the cost to produce them, but not the amount of power they put out for a given amount of fuel. Second, the ONLY person here comparing 1972 diesel engines to anything else is you. Over and over you've made these ridiculous comparisons that have no bearing on what manufacturers are making today, or could make today if there was a business case for doing so.

Go find a modern DI gasser engine from a tractor, or similar machine, get some data from it, and then you'll have something worthy of comparison.

Oh wait, nobody makes that engine, do they? There's probably a good reason for that, and it's not because the manufacturers are trying to upset you.

 

[buickanddeere]

Go find a modern DI gasser engine from a tractor, or similar machine, get some data from it, and then you'll have something worthy of comparison.

Oh wait, nobody makes that engine, do they? There's probably a good reason for that, and it's not because the manufacturers are trying to upset you.

I explained to you why, it's not a level playing field world wide. If every country mandated Tier IV diesel and diesel cost more than gasoline . DI gassers would have a significant market. Are there people here unaware of the rest of the world outside the US borders ?
I also stated residential use which most CUT machines are operated under. A landscaper, construction company, chicken barn cleaner or golf course is a HD application, not light duty.
How do you propose reducing CO2 emissions without burning a "lighter" fuel ?

 

[terryknight]

I explained to you why, it's not a level playing field world wide. If every country mandated Tier IV diesel and diesel cost more than gasoline . DI gassers would have a significant market. Are there people here unaware of the rest of the world outside the US borders ?
I also stated residential use which most CUT machines are operated under. A landscaper, construction company, chicken barn cleaner or golf course is a HD application, not light duty.
How do you propose reducing CO2 emissions without burning a "lighter" fuel ?

couple things one "if" is a hypothetical and not actually the case. Sorry reality is not every country/government mandates tier IV and the cost of gas isn't always less than the cost of diesel; that is just the world we live in. two diesel engines already produce less CO2 than an equal displacement gas engine

 

[mo1]

But if the fuel efficiency of the GR2120 is ALREADY considerably better than the GR2020 . . . Imagine what it would be compared to the ECV749 engine.

Gas engines are superior to diesel engines when speed is the goal . . which is why cars, outboards, motorcycles, atvs and small engines are gas. But IMO when power is the goal and long term durability under power draw . . Diesel has the advantage and a considerable fuel efficiency improvement over gas. Thats why tractors, construction equopment, semi and hauling trucks of all sizes are diesel. Speed and weight versus power, efficiency, and durability.

Gasoline engines are also considerably less expensive to buy and their routine maintenance costs are lower than diesels, although the latter really only becomes very pronounced with much larger engines than in a SCUT/CUT. Whether or not you actually save any money in the long run in getting a diesel engine over a gasoline engine depends on the price differential, fuel consumption of the engine in gallons/hour, how many hours you put on the piece of equipment, and how long you keep the piece of equipment. It takes thousands of hours of operation to make up the cost of the diesel engine something like the Kubota GR when the overall fuel consumption rates are small and fuel cost differences are around a dollar an hour at current fuel prices. That's a whole lot different than a semi or twin screw dump truck (or a several hundred HP row-crop tractor) where the fuel cost differences would be about $50-75/hour between a diesel and a gasoline engine.

Your example of the Kubota GR21xx also brings up an important point in why diesels may seem more preferable than gassers in the same piece of equipment. A diesel engine is more expensive than a gasoline engine and the manufacturer will have a much easier time in getting people to shell out the extra cash if the buyer actually gets a larger/more powerful engine in the process. The GR's gasser is a smaller-displacement, lower-hp and lower-torque engine than the diesel Kubota specced to put in that unit. Kubota could have specced a smaller diesel with similar torque (but less HP)or a similar displacement (and less HP and torque) to the gasser, but it would likely sell relatively poorly compared to the more-powerful on all counts diesel they did spec. Look at 3/4 and 1-ton pickups' diesel engines. They sell well in no small part as they are considerably more powerful than the gasoline engines offered. Horsepower numbers are generally about the same as the largest gasser but there's twice as much torque and the engine as a result is a lot more powerful. Now compare that to the relatively anemic sales of the relatively anemic 3.0 L V6 VM Motori diesel in the Ram 1500. That engine is about as powerful as the base V6 but more expensive than any of the other engines (including the 5.7 L Hemi which is vastly more powerful), so it is JUST an "it gets better mileage" engine. Its sales are a tiny fraction of the total Ram 1500 units sold vs. the Cummins's share in the 2500 and 3500 units.

 

[AxleHub]

Gasoline engines are also considerably less expensive to buy and their routine maintenance costs are lower than diesels, although the latter really only becomes very pronounced with much larger engines than in a SCUT/CUT.

Mo1, you're like the carnival barker with the ring toss. You keep skipping around on topics to distract people from noticing you don't answer the points being made.

Now who believes that maintenance costs on comparable gas engines are considerably cheaper than diesel?

But you said "routine" because gas engines have considerably more maintenance needs than do diesels . . but not the oil changes and filter changes. The point IS NOT about routine maintenance . . the point is about all maintenance . . and gas engines have far greater maintenance costs and frequency than do diesels.

Now compare that to the relatively anemic sales of the relatively anemic 3.0 L V6 VM Motori diesel in the Ram 1500. That engine is about as powerful as the base V6 but more expensive than any of the other engines (including the 5.7 L Hemi which is vastly more powerful), so it is JUST an "it gets better mileage" engine. Its sales are a tiny fraction of the total Ram 1500 units sold vs. the Cummins's share in the 2500 and 3500 units.

Well rhe Ram you are refering to is the "eco diesel" typically using the 8 speed transmission. It gets an epa rating of 29 and a real world 31 while the hemi engine with passive drop offs gets 23 under perfect conditions.

So fuel costs are greatly different. Even more importantly . . you seemed to have forgotten to mention the "eco diesel" is a new product model while the hemi with 8 fpeed has been out since 2013 and then with av6 speed since 2012 and av5 speed since 2010 0r 2009. Of corse the brand new model undersells the hemi.

so now in the next post lets cover the debate head on.

 

[AxleHub]

Head on . . You dance around scuts maybe cuts maybe ??? You switch directions like that carny barker.

I have a tier 4 massey tractor with an Iseki 25 horse 3 cylinder diesel. I claim there isn't a gas engine by any major manufacturer in GENERAL PRODUCTION that matches the combination of

1. air quality
2. Fuel efficiency in a mowing or tractor based activity
3. That can deliver the steady power and quantity of life expectancy in hours of use in a mowing or tractor based activity

In a comparable price and sizing with similar maintenance costs and requirements.

But you keep saying there is a gas engine that is the match of my Iseki under the above conditions. So tell us what it is and where do we go to test one out?

 

[hutchman]

I have enough problems with gas in my small engines ... I sure don't want my tractor I'm wanting to last for a LONG time to suffer the same fate ... don't have to look too far to see its a headache not worth having if you can help it:

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...-damage-caused-ethanol-gasoline-new-post.html

Maintenance costs? Yea, I get that comment a lot with my car. Factory oil change interval for that is 10K miles on the oil. Do you do that in your gasser? And before the gubment changed the API spec to CJ4, it was REAL easy to use oil analysis to do extended intervals safely to 20K miles.

... and I don't have to buy any spark plugs (or plug wires etc.)

 

[mo1]

Mo1, you're like the carnival barker with the ring toss. You keep skipping around on topics to distract people from noticing you don't answer the points being made.

You don't address the major issue I brought up, which is overall cost of operation. You avoid it and only mention extreme long-tail longevity and specific fuel consumption. Maybe those are the most important to you, but there are certainly other considerations which may be more important for others.

Now who believes that maintenance costs on comparable gas engines are considerably cheaper than diesel?

Anybody who has ever had to change the oil and air/fuel/oil filters on a diesel vs. a gas engine will know this.

But you said "routine" because gas engines have considerably more maintenance needs than do diesels . . but not the oil changes and filter changes. The point IS NOT about routine maintenance . . the point is about all maintenance . . and gas engines have far greater maintenance costs and frequency than do diesels.

Not really. Routine oil and filter changes are similar in frequency with small filter-equipped gasoline vs. small diesel engines at about every 100-200 hours. Automotive diesels and gasoline engines have similar service intervals. The difference is that the diesels' filters are more expensive and they require much more oil than a gasoline engine.

I think what you are talking about is time until you need a rebuild, which is going to be longer for diesels. But that is a very, very long time (essentially "forever") on a small engine that gets only a hundred hours or so a year worth of use. Again, this is grossly different from an engine in a team-operated semi that may put on 100 hours in a week.

Well rhe Ram you are refering to is the "eco diesel" typically using the 8 speed transmission. It gets an epa rating of 29 and a real world 31 while the hemi engine with passive drop offs gets 23 under perfect conditions.

So fuel costs are greatly different. Even more importantly . . you seemed to have forgotten to mention the "eco diesel" is a new product model while the hemi with 8 fpeed has been out since 2013 and then with av6 speed since 2012 and av5 speed since 2010 0r 2009. Of corse the brand new model undersells the hemi.

The 3.5 L V6 EcoBoost was a brand-new engine for Ford in 2011 and had similar discussions over maintenance and cost concerns and a promise of improved fuel mileage. The EcoBoost was sold in about half of all F-150s that year, which was a far higher percentage than the percentage of Ram 1500s with the VM Motori diesel. Just because an engine is new and more expensive doesn't mean it can't sell well. The issue is that the VM Motori engine in the Ram's only selling point is fuel economy. It is not too tough to estimate how long you will have to have the vehicle based on your average mileage and the differences in fuel economy and fuel prices to determine when you will break even on paying back the higher initial cost and ongoing costs of the diesel engine. For many people, it will be longer than they anticipate owning the vehicle and thus the engine with slightly higher fuel economy actually ends up costing them more over their lifetime with the engine.

 

[mo1]

Maintenance costs? Yea, I get that comment a lot with my car. Factory oil change interval for that is 10K miles on the oil. Do you do that in your gasser? And before the gubment changed the API spec to CJ4, it was REAL easy to use oil analysis to do extended intervals safely to 20K miles.

... and I don't have to buy any spark plugs (or plug wires etc.)

The service interval on my gasoline-powered pickup engine is also approximately 10,000 miles. The engine has an oil life meter and it will allow for up to 10,000 miles between changes. The interval ends up being either one year or 10,000 miles, whichever comes first, so in practice it's 10,000 miles. Newer gasoline engines are coil on plug and don't have spark plug wires. Spark plugs also get changed only every 100,000-150,000 miles and cost less than a hundred bucks for a set of good ones for a V8 engine.

 

[hutchman]

Anybody who has ever had to change the oil and air/fuel/oil filters on a diesel vs. a gas engine will know this.

Yes, I agree with you ... and I do know. I have 4 diesels with almost a million miles combined and we'll over 4,000 hours on one unit. And since I do all the engine work on said engines I do know their maintenance cost and it is not more than had all the above been gas engines.

 

[hutchman]

Oh, and my 2 VW TDI's only use 4.5 quarts with oil/filter change ... same as about all the other 4 cylinder gas engines on the planet. And my oil filter costs about $6 because it is a paper cartridge ... not a spin on with a lot of metal etc.

 

[hutchman]

The service interval on my gasoline-powered pickup engine is also approximately 10,000 miles. The engine has an oil life meter and it will allow for up to 10,000 miles between changes.

I'm not saying I don't believe you. I'm saying I don't know or have heard of anyone doing 10K OCI's with a gas anything. I don't know or have heard of any shops that advocate such a thing either. Maybe with some special Uber oil from Amsoil but not stuff mere mortals buy at walmart.

 

[aczlan]

I'm not saying I don't believe you. I'm saying I don't know or have heard of anyone doing 10K OCI's with a gas anything. I don't know or have heard of any shops that advocate such a thing either. Maybe with some special Uber oil from Amsoil but not stuff mere mortals buy at walmart.

Mobile 1 is sold at Walmart and they claim 15k mile OCI:

Mobil 1 Extended Performance is an advanced full synthetic motor oil that keeps your engine running like new and provides protection for up to 15,000 miles between oil changes – guaranteed.

I have been doing 10k mile OCIs on my '97 Volvo V90 for the last few years with no ill effects, I just change the oil in Nov when I install my snowtires.

Aaron Z