ULSD rant

[AKwelder]

It just came up today that the companies with Diesel trucks in the oil fields here have decided that it is easier to start buying gasoline trucks then work with the ULSD engine problems . They have NO gasoline trucks or the infrastructure to fuel them, but the problems on the particulate filters and injection make keeping the diesel trucks warm and running impossible. So they are going to install what they need to allow them to buy gasoline trucks and avoid the problems

BP just returned 150 plus newly leased diesel trucks and wants gasoline replacements. There are thousands of trucks on the North Slope, and now they are looking at a complete phase out of diesel trucks.

The truckers bringing the big loads over the mountain passes are also reporting that the system regeneration kicking in at the wrong time has become scary. One friend said he was pushing 120K pounds and just reached the top when the regeneration kicked in and he lost power. He said he would have spun out or worse if it had happen just a minute earlier.

So now they are using MORE Fuel to do the same work. The trucks are becoming unusable, what a mess

 

[Gale Hawkins]

With a lot more time and money they will overcome these issues. Diesels are not going way but I think any diesel engine owner would agree for stop and go use in small trucks that diesel would not be ideal on the North Slope unless you have 120 volts where you stop.

 

[Argosy]

I thought you were talking about pickups, then I read 120,000 lbs. Where are they finding gas powered trucks that will haul that kind of weight? The new diesels might need some tweaking, but they haven't seen anything until they try that with gas.

 

[Baby Grand]

Ha-ha-ha! That's rich. Use a gas job to do a diesel's work. Oh, it hurts to laugh this hard. I think some posturing is going on to force a change in the ULSD policy - either change the trucks or change the regulations.

I worked for a lumber company in the 70's. We had Macks with little Scania I-6 diesels and 2 Fords with huge, V-8 gas power. The gas engines were a joke. Even with a 20 speed tranny they could barely crest a hill with a moderate load. I remember singing "I Love a Parade" at the top of my lungs as the engine moaned and the horn chorus from the string of angry motorists behind me grew to a crescendo. It took no small amount of skill to drop that slug into the low range without losing momentum when the grades got really steep.

 

[chopped]

'Progress' gotta love it..I now drive a 13 year old car with twice plus the engine as my 5 year old car had. All because the govt has flunked it on inspection(emmision), It would be one thing if they could say just what part was bad. but I spend 650 dollars already and no luck. So Ill keep burning double the gas and polluting .YAY>>> with more power too.

 

[Newblue]

Sad but I had to spend another $1500 to overcome these issues on my truck. EGR and DPF delete and my mileage went from 13 to 19. Another bad thing is that it's not legal to do this in all states.

 

[20 20]

the BS the beaurocrats are pulling on the diesel engine is assinine.

 

[wvpolekat]

The truckers bringing the big loads over the mountain passes are also reporting that the system regeneration kicking in at the wrong time has become scary. One friend said he was pushing 120K pounds and just reached the top when the regeneration kicked in and he lost power. He said he would have spun out or worse if it had happen just a minute earlier.

They need to learn their equipment then. On the new Macks we got for plow trucks, you can delay it so many times or for so long. It doesn't just happen.

 

[Diamondpilot]

It really has nothing to do with ULSD. Its the emissions crap that is on these engines. I would love to have a new F-350 but have just decided to wait till one of two things happen. They get the truck more reliable or the aftermarket comes up with a real fix. Just have to keep my 06 and keep on trucking.

Chris

 

[slowzuki]

Should have got a urea based units! Really though the emissions stuff isn't optimized for far north cold weather use.

 

[Highbeam]

Great post newblue, see, that junk can be removed. Unfortunately very illegal (federal laws) and pretty easy to get caught.

It's not the ULSD causing problems described by the OP. It is the EPA's mandated pollution control. I run ULSD in my 2000 powerstroke and have no problems with a DPF or regen.

 

[KBL3830]

So where are they selling all the trucks they're getting rid of prey tell?????

 

[Johnbro]

Some studies have shown that regulations force change faster than waiting for voluntary compliance.

In the 60s cars had no emissions controls and ran fine.
In the 70s emission controls were mandated and the cars ran like poo.
In the 80s mfgs had given up on kludges like EGR and had switched to DME and electronic fuel injection. result: cars ran great, got better fuel economy, and produced fewer emissions and are way more reliable. They are also more expensive, naturally.

The manufacturers whined and complained and said it couldn't be done (CAFE plus clean air standards) but they did it when they were forced.

I'm not advocating bad-running diesels (although the new 2011 F350 runs GREAT) but I'm not in favor of air pollution either. I'm just saying in the long run sometimes these kind of problems lead to improvements.

 

[PoorMansCat]

The last round of diesel emission laws for light duty pickups was/is a complete failure. I have an 06 model diesel pickup that gets a consistent 18-21 mpg, hand calculated. Take the current offerings by the big three and unless you remove the emissions equipment none of them are capable of making the same fuel economy numbers. The trucks aren't capable of doing more work, so where is the advantage of LESS fuel economy?

 

[Diamondpilot]

The last round of diesel emission laws for light duty pickups was/is a complete failure. I have an 06 model diesel pickup that gets a consistent 18-21 mpg, hand calculated. Take the current offerings by the big three and unless you remove the emissions equipment none of them are capable of making the same fuel economy numbers. The trucks aren't capable of doing more work, so where is the advantage of LESS fuel economy?

While this was true for the 2007.5 though 2010 the 2011's from Ford and GM are doing much better with the DEF. From the reports I have seen on the new Ford its averaging about 18mpg.

Chris

 

[AKwelder]

let me clear up a couple things

1) I started talking about pickups. The fleet leases they have. And no one wants anything to do with these trucks when they are done. Arctic cold in the winter and sea breezes all summer (salt)

2) Being able to plug in is not enough, by the time the engine and the cab warm the DPF is crunched. And the speed limit on the field is 35 MPH. So no high speed runs to clean the filter

3) The problems are not just on the pick ups. The truck drivers getting new rigs are having fits. losing time due to complications and break downs. Most of the older trucks are going to stay on the road a long time

4) As for the delay on the regeneration, please remember that it can take 6 hours to get over the pass, how long can you delay it? Trust me, the haul road to the north slope is the worst in america. steep grades and brutal weather.

5) UREA does freeze, or at least gells to the point it won't work. Of coarse it was 58 below.

The systems on the trucks are not very usable.

 

[Skyco]

Sad but I had to spend another $1500 to overcome these issues on my truck. EGR and DPF delete and my mileage went from 13 to 19. Another bad thing is that it's not legal to do this in all states.

It is not legal to do it in ANY state. It is a federal violation, which you just documented for all the world to see

All the emissions junk on new trucks will keep me driving my 96 Powerstroke until the wheels fall off, then I'll fix that and keep going...:thumbsup:

 

[davygp38]

Some studies have shown that regulations force change faster than waiting for voluntary compliance.

In the 60s cars had no emissions controls and ran fine.
In the 70s emission controls were mandated and the cars ran like poo.
In the 80s mfgs had given up on kludges like EGR and had switched to DME and electronic fuel injection. result: cars ran great, got better fuel economy, and produced fewer emissions and are way more reliable. They are also more expensive, naturally.

The manufacturers whined and complained and said it couldn't be done (CAFE plus clean air standards) but they did it when they were forced.

I'm not advocating bad-running diesels (although the new 2011 F350 runs GREAT) but I'm not in favor of air pollution either. I'm just saying in the long run sometimes these kind of problems lead to improvements.

I totally agree, and anybody who Quotes "lucky Jack Aubry," must know what he is talking about.

 

[Newblue]

It is not legal to do it in ANY state. It is a federal violation, which you just documented for all the world to see

All the emissions junk on new trucks will keep me driving my 96 Powerstroke until the wheels fall off, then I'll fix that and keep going...:thumbsup:

Show me the emissions laws that pertain to the dpf and egr removal. The only one I know of is that the cat has to stay and I didn't say anything about removing that. I'm not trying to be a butt head just uninformed. I can also tell you that EGR on a diesel is a bad thing. Pumping soot and exhaust gases back into the intake is a good way to kill a diesel.

Edit: This pertains to pre-2010 engines

 

[JB4310]

Show me the emissions laws that pertain to the dpf and egr removal. The only one I know of is that the cat has to stay and I didn't say anything about removing that. I'm not trying to be a butt head just uninformed. I can also tell you that EGR on a diesel is a bad thing. Pumping soot and exhaust gases back into the intake is a good way to kill a diesel.

Edit: This pertains to pre-2010 engines

I salute you for doing that, I'm thinking about it myself. Mine is a chassis truck so no cat (I think). Some I read about on the diesel forums said no great increase in mpg, but a much nicer running truck, more power, better sound etc.

But in my case I don't see an imediate need.

I have the first 07 6.7 CTD that required ULSD. I'm getting the same milage with this truck as I did with my 95 Cummins powered Dodge, and this truck weighs 3,000 pounds more and has almost 2 times the HP as the 95. It is no MPG to brag about but what can I complain about either.

The North slope probably should have seperate standards or waivers to keep those machines running in extreme conditions.

JB