Common rail vs mechanical injection

   / Common rail vs mechanical injection
  • Thread Starter
#81  
Thanks for all the replies. It sounds like it's pretty much a wash on the injection system. Simplicity vs power and fuel economy.

The tractors I was looking at are all tier 3, so the DEF, DPF garbage isn't a factor.
The Case Maxxum pro has CR and was tier 3 until 2013 or so, and there are a few later Value series with CR as well.

I was looking at the 120HP range Massey Ferguson/ Challenger too. They started using CR around 2007 or 2008, so there are quite a few years of them in tier 3.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #82  
Thanks for all the replies. It sounds like it's pretty much a wash on the injection system. Simplicity vs power and fuel economy.

The tractors I was looking at are all tier 3, so the DEF, DPF garbage isn't a factor.
The Case Maxxum pro has CR and was tier 3 until 2013 or so, and there are a few later Value series with CR as well.

I was looking at the 120HP range Massey Ferguson/ Challenger too. They started using CR around 2007 or 2008, so there are quite a few years of them in tier 3.

Can you give me a reference to Tier 3 standards? What years & HP did Tier 3 apply? I am familiar with the Tier 4 Interim that was used from 2007 to the end of 2012....but not familiar with Tier 3 at all. Maybe it's a different engine size.

Anyway, you might want to look at engines with the Tier 4 Interim as well. It turns out that our M59 is a Tier 4 Interim from 2008. They didn't have DEF or DPF and used mechanical indirect injection. Some had EGR assemblies.

I like the softer sound & simplicity of the older indirect injected diesels, but they do make a lot more smoke and soot.
rScotty
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #83  
Thanks for all the replies. It sounds like it's pretty much a wash on the injection system. Simplicity vs power and fuel economy.

The tractors I was looking at are all tier 3, so the DEF, DPF garbage isn't a factor.
The Case Maxxum pro has CR and was tier 3 until 2013 or so, and there are a few later Value series with CR as well.

I was looking at the 120HP range Massey Ferguson/ Challenger too. They started using CR around 2007 or 2008, so there are quite a few years of them in tier 3.
You might be able to get one of the AGCOs (Massey, Challenger, AGCOs) with a CVT. I have a 7495 and love it.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #84  
You can also view it this way:
Mechanical is easy to troubleshoot, generally very dependable trouble free
Common rail = computer driven, trouble codes, downtime is usually greater
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #85  
Can you give me a reference to Tier 3 standards? What years & HP did Tier 3 apply? I am familiar with the Tier 4 Interim that was used from 2007 to the end of 2012....but not familiar with Tier 3 at all. Maybe it's a different engine size.

Anyway, you might want to look at engines with the Tier 4 Interim as well. It turns out that our M59 is a Tier 4 Interim from 2008. They didn't have DEF or DPF and used mechanical indirect injection. Some had EGR assemblies.

I like the softer sound & simplicity of the older indirect injected diesels, but they do make a lot more smoke and soot.
rScotty

Never mind, I figured it out. Or at least partly, the emissions regs are complicated and full of special case exemptions.

Basically engines over 75 hp had until 2012 to get 25% of their engines to meet to meet the Tier 4 emission requirements. Then in 2015 all engines 75 hp had to meet Tier IV requirements - unless they fit some of the many pages of loopholes...including something called "banked compliance credits". Tier 4 Interim for our Kubota M59 uses one of those "loopholes" for pre-existing engines.

So until sometime between 2012 to the end of 2014, it looks like most diesel engines could be Tier 3 - just as you said. The emission restrictions didn't amount to anything on those engines and so they could use mechanical injection with an indirect injection head configuration.
Most of the reduction in emissions during this time was due to changes in diesel fuel, not to diesel engines.

After 2015, ALL diesel engines had to meet the present Tier 4 standards (unless they meet pages and pages of exceptions and alternatives). Most manufacturers met Tier 4 requirements by changing to direct injection engines having computer control, plus some sort of emission reduction system.

BTW, a footnote in the regs says the goal is that by 2030 when all diesel engines are Tier 4, 12,000 premature deaths per year will be prevented by the reduction in diesel emissions.


Screen Shot 2021-11-29 at 7.15.31 AM.png

rScotty
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #86  
Still don't understand the maintenance argument electronic vs mechanical. Only diesel issues I have ever had have been the old mechanical ones. The mechanical pumps run really rough on a good day too.

We sell off our fleet trucks at 600,000km none have had engine issues since cummins went electronic.
No Turbo issues either.

The tractors on the farm are the same story, the new stuff is great.

at 2200’ asl Turbo is a wonderful thing to have.

Don't overthink it, just drive them.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #87  
Yup, I love my new powerstroke diesel with all of the things that can and will eventually fail it has awesome power. I also was very fond my old 7.3 mechanical injection truck that was as simple as it gets and without a doubt one of the most reliable engines ever put under a hood.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #88  
From my limited experience with direct injection, it is great. All the positives but the fuel pumps are quite expensive to replace. The common fuel rail has to be pressurized at high PSI in order to properly atomize the fuel across the injectors.

We had a German car that also had DI, its pressure was 1600 PSI. A pump that reach those levels doesn't come cheap.

Haasman
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #89  
Reminds me of all the horror stories with the Bosch fuel pump used on the new Ford powerstrokes, when they fail due to (mostly water in fuel) it isn't covered under warranty and comes with a price tag of around 10k. OUCH!
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #90  
I've noticed that properly running mechanic pump diesel starts a whole lot quicker than a common rail. My grandpa's 1974 John Deere 830 with it's German-made diesel starts within 1 second regardless of temperature - I don't know what they did to make it work so well but I just keep it supplied with clean fuel. Also my buddies 12v Cummins starts quicker than either one of our 6.7 Cummins. I don't know for sure, but it seems the sensors need to see a couple rotations to be sure of the speed where the mechanical just works no matter the speed.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #91  
I hear you Rooster, same goes for my buddy's common rail 5.9 Cummins in his 92 Dodge pickup. It almost seems like it starts before I even turn the key.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #92  
A '92 Dodge would definitely not come stock with a common rail
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #93  
Hall, good catch my bad it certainly isn't. It's the mechanical setup just as it should be. DUH:)
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #94  
First diesel on our farm was a 1939 TD-6 International. Injection pressure 1500 psi. Move on to my last IDI engine near that horsepower class, a Kubota L5740. Injection pressure increased all the way to 2000 psi. Remember its the pressure that breaks the fuel into droplets with higher injection pressure resulting in smaller droplets, more surface area exposed to air, and more complete combustion. I remember my dad coming in from the fields after working with that TD-6 and he would be covered with soot. Under extreme load, it made the neatest little soot circles that settled on your clothes. In his 60's dad was diagnosed with a problem most commonly related to heavy smokers, but he never smoked. I remember in his 30's and 40's and that incomplete combustion diesel smoke. My L5740, now Tier 3 emissions, was similarly a nasty smoker although it didn't make those little smoke rings. I don't have a shop manual for my L6060 so I can't tell you the injection pressure, but my M7-171 manual says variable high pressure depending on requirements but relief valve in the fuel rail limiting pressure to 36,000 psi. I will never know how much the injection pressure reduces soot because the DPF takes care of any remaining. Incidentally our first direct injection diesel tractor was a 1963 International 806 with 2000 psi injection pressure, same as the IDI Kubota L5740. In between there is Caterpillar's HEUI injectors that give about 5,400 psi at low speed low power and 23,500 psi at high speed high power - and anywhere in between based on demand.

All of these changes have been made to get better fuel economy and lower emissions. One of my friends at Cat worked for over a year sitting at a computer terminal tweaking unit injectors to get the best fuel flow and improved fuel economy when Cat got a contract to supply engines for GM trucks. He said they would get atta-boys for every fraction of a percent of fuel economy improvement as it was so important to GMC.

Applications - fluid flow at high pressure with contamination = wear. That has always been a diesel problem even with 1500 psi TD-6 engines, but materials technology was ancient back then. Limitations of improving diesel performance has always been material technology. Even with improving materials, it is easier to reduce injection system wear by filtering. I have a couple injectors sitting on my desk as a reminder of what a customer can do saving money in the short run costing money in the long run. He bought a test machine we had a customer run for 2,500 hours with no problem. Thirty hours later I got a call that the engine wouldn't start. Sent a dealer to check. The customer had replaced our filter with a will fit as one of these "buying it used, will change all the fluids and filters before putting it to work". Only thing he replaced a highly developed filter with a common brand "will fit the same mount" filter. In this case I was not going to let the customer get stuck for his mistake and paid the dealer to replace the injectors - and install the proper fuel filter. But that is how quickly systems can fail using inferior filtration. Incidentally, before selling the machine, I had the dealer perform an injector leakage test to insure the injectors still worked right after 2500 hours (this was implementing common rail in a Tier 3 engine). They were fine. It took only 30 hours using fuel in the Atlanta, Georgia, area with the incorrect filter to take out injectors.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #95  
Turbo rebuild is 500+ plus all of the piping, so around 1k.

Turbos are killed faster when shutdown hot. Idle for half an hour so they cool down kills any savings.

Average turbo life is measured in 100s of hours before the bearings wear out.

Will never buy a turbo diesel again.
Turbos life changed entirely when they were mfrd to share pressurized lubrication with the engines. The automotive industry had to have 100K mile guarantees to compete and they were dead if the turbos failed in large numbers at low mileage. That is why newer turbos last way, way longer and are not the liability they once were. That fact of life migrated from cars to tractors in a fairly short time.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #96  
To the best of my knowledge all turbos have always been lubed by engine oil,
especially tractor turbos.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #97  
Regarding computer and associated electronics common rail versus all mechanical fuel injection I read a study about 15 years ago about all mechanical versus all electronic power steering in Mercedes cars. I don't know if the results can be compared to fuel injection but here goes. In Mercedes cars the fully electronic power steering, which had no mechanical connection between the steering wheel and the front wheels, was more reliable up to and including catastrophic failure than mechanical power steering. I was shocked. Really. In these Mercedes cars the fully drive by wire steering was safer and more reliable than mechanical steering. Their cars with drive by wire steering were less likely to have steering problems and less likely to have a catastrophic failure than their cars with steering that had the steering wheel connected to to front wheels. I dunno If the results were because of excellent electrical components, poor mechanical components, or a combination of the two. Or if the electronics and associated components were intrinsically more reliable than mechanical ccomponents. But I was truly shocked, especially when it came to catastrophic failure, where the driver lost all control over the front wheels, and could not control the steering. Will common rail fuel injection get there? Could it already be there on some tractors?
Eric
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #98  
Regarding computer and associated electronics common rail versus all mechanical fuel injection I read a study about 15 years ago about all mechanical versus all electronic power steering in Mercedes cars. I don't know if the results can be compared to fuel injection but here goes. In Mercedes cars the fully electronic power steering, which had no mechanical connection between the steering wheel and the front wheels, was more reliable up to and including catastrophic failure than mechanical power steering. I was shocked. Really. In these Mercedes cars the fully drive by wire steering was safer and more reliable than mechanical steering. Their cars with drive by wire steering were less likely to have steering problems and less likely to have a catastrophic failure than their cars with steering that had the steering wheel connected to to front wheels. I dunno If the results were because of excellent electrical components, poor mechanical components, or a combination of the two. Or if the electronics and associated components were intrinsically more reliable than mechanical ccomponents. But I was truly shocked, especially when it came to catastrophic failure, where the driver lost all control over the front wheels, and could not control the steering. Will common rail fuel injection get there? Could it already be there on some tractors?
Eric

I agree with your points and I am amazed at the reliability of all steer by wire steering article you refer to.
However, with mechanical versus common rail, there’s another variable, fuel. Fuel quality affects different injection systems, pumps and different injectors differently.
Steering does not have fuel affecting it.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #99  
Yepper, true statement the high-pressure fuel pumps of today are shall we say finicky. Prone to grenade due to moisture, water, inferior fuel I only buy fuel from high volume stations for my powerstroke. Our local Southern States fuel has a Cetane rating of 50 which I use for all of my diesel engines.
 
   / Common rail vs mechanical injection #100  
Yepper, true statement the high-pressure fuel pumps of today are shall we say finicky. Prone to grenade due to moisture, water, inferior fuel I only buy fuel from high volume stations for my powerstroke. Our local Southern States fuel has a Cetane rating of 50 which I use for all of my diesel engines.
But how many owners of CR fuel systems base their fuel filter choices on price?
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

SEMI AUTOMATIC QUICK-CHANGER FOR MINI EXCAVATOR (A58214)
SEMI AUTOMATIC...
Dayton 32965 80-Gallon Horizontal Air Compressor, 22 Volts, 5 HP, 2 Stage, 3 Phase (A59076)
Dayton 32965...
207274 (A52708)
207274 (A52708)
2021 Billy Goat F902H Walk-Behind Debris Blower (A59228)
2021 Billy Goat...
2018 New Holland C227 Compact Track Loader (A56438)
2018 New Holland...
2021 KUBOTA SVL75-2 SKID STEER (A60429)
2021 KUBOTA...
 
Top