Whats wrong with tier 4

[dave1949]

Just for the sake of clarity and because I don't have a clear picture of the relative sizes of these particulates being discussed:

Particulates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Subtypes of atmospheric particle matter include suspended particulate matter (SPM), respirable suspended particle (RSP; particles with diameter of 10 micrometres or less), fine particles (diameter of 2.5 micrometres or less), ultrafine particles, and soot.

2.5 micrometers (microns) = 9.84251969 × 10-5 inches (.0000984251969")


Soot is a powder-like form of amorphous carbon[citation needed]. The gas-phase soots contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The PAHs in soot are known mutagens and are classified as a "known human carcinogen" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Soot can be classified as soot nanoparticles. Soot forms during incomplete combustion from precursor molecules such as acetylene. It consists of agglomerated nanoparticles with diameters between 5 to 30 nm. The soot particles can be mixed with metal oxides and with minerals and can be coated with sulfuric acid.

5 nm (nanometers) = 1.96850394 × 10-7 inches (.000000196850394")
30 nm (nanometers) = 1.18110236 × 10-6 inches (.00000118110236")

Nanoparticle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nanoparticles are particles between 1 and 100 nanometers in size. In nanotechnology, a particle is defined as a small object that behaves as a whole unit with respect to its transport and properties. Particles are further classified according to diameter. Ultrafine particles are the same as nanoparticles and between 1 and 100 nanometers in size. Coarse particles cover a range between 2,500 and 10,000 nanometers. Fine particles are sized between 100 and 2,500 nanometers.

 

[KevT]

? is what I thought. That tractor should be selling for a minimum of 20k.

Not quite, they gave me $5000 for the JD, but I also traded a ford P/U that they gave me $4000 on for the JD. So I figured that was a wash

 

[KevT]

And the Kubota has a hard canopy, the JD did not

 

[KevT]

Just for the sake of clarity and because I don't have a clear picture of the relative sizes of these particulates being discussed:

Particulates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Subtypes of atmospheric particle matter include suspended particulate matter (SPM), respirable suspended particle (RSP; particles with diameter of 10 micrometres or less), fine particles (diameter of 2.5 micrometres or less), ultrafine particles, and soot.

2.5 micrometers (microns) = 9.84251969 × 10-5 inches (.0000984251969")


Soot is a powder-like form of amorphous carbon[citation needed]. The gas-phase soots contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The PAHs in soot are known mutagens and are classified as a "known human carcinogen" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Soot can be classified as soot nanoparticles. Soot forms during incomplete combustion from precursor molecules such as acetylene. It consists of agglomerated nanoparticles with diameters between 5 to 30 nm. The soot particles can be mixed with metal oxides and with minerals and can be coated with sulfuric acid.

5 nm (nanometers) = 1.96850394 × 10-7 inches (.000000196850394")
30 nm (nanometers) = 1.18110236 × 10-6 inches (.00000118110236")

Nanoparticle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nanoparticles are particles between 1 and 100 nanometers in size. In nanotechnology, a particle is defined as a small object that behaves as a whole unit with respect to its transport and properties. Particles are further classified according to diameter. Ultrafine particles are the same as nanoparticles and between 1 and 100 nanometers in size. Coarse particles cover a range between 2,500 and 10,000 nanometers. Fine particles are sized between 100 and 2,500 nanometers.

HUH????

 

[dave1949]

HUH????

The sizes are given in scientific notation. "9.84251969 × 10-5 inches" would be spoken as 9.84.... times 10 to the minus 5 inches.

I converted that to simple inches: .0000984251969" because I don't think in scientific notation.

 

[oldpilgrim]

WOW you must be rich! :shocked:

Quoting the link:
"direct result of a $30 million dollar investment "

Nothing about $30M says cheap to me!

For an international company the size of Mahindra and it's parent company, and for companies the size of Kubota and Deere, an investment that size, though not insignificant, is not an overwhelming budget item...especially if it might have a good chance of increasing their market share.

If Mahindra could do it, the others could. If the others can't or don't want to, they could license it from Mahindra. Mahindra gains from the fees, and the others keep their market share.

Maybe Mahindra won't license it, so as to gain an edge. I can see why they might not want to.

 

[DavesTractor]

For an international company the size of Mahindra and it's parent company, and for companies the size of Kubota and Deere, an investment that size, though not insignificant, is not an overwhelming budget item...especially if it might have a good chance of increasing their market share.

If Mahindra could do it, the others could. If the others can't or don't want to, they could license it from Mahindra. Mahindra gains from the fees, and the others keep their market share.

Maybe Mahindra won't license it, so as to gain an edge. I can see why they might not want to.

$30M isn't a ton of money for a company that produces and sells over 200,000 tractors a year. If you want to spread the Tier IV cost across all units, that is $150/tractor. Granted, most of those units are spread around the world and most are not Tier IV, but it does go to show that there is a huge advantage to volume.

I'm a Mahindra dealer and a Mahindra fan, but I am still a little perplexed as to why other engine builders did not go the same route. It would be hard to find a more respected diesel engine than Kubota or Yanmar, yet I think they are going the DPF route. I can't think that we thought of something or some way to skin the cat that others did not think about. But here we are, no DPF, and we are happy with that. If there is a downside to the mCRD approach, I haven't found it yet.

 

[oldpilgrim]

Dont forget all the trucks and other diesel products Mahindra makes.

They should make out like bandits with their new technology.

 

[truckdiagnostics]

Been looking at this a little more. DPF is going away and they are getting it figured out. The Mahindra mCRD is using a Bosch common rail fuel system which is giving them a better control of the combustion process. For what ever reason they where able to get the design into there tractor faster? Looks like all the rest had it figured out but could not get the advances in technology into production. Here is a bunch of links,
Mahindra mCRD Diesel Technology

Cummins Engines

https://www.dieselnet.com/news/2014/07kubota.php

https://www.deere.com/en_US/corpora...3/engines_drivetrain/2013apr17_power_ft4.page

Theoretically if they are getting more complete combustion in the combustion chamber they should be getting more power for fueled burned, better fuel economy, lower emissions. At first glance not seeing a down side. So, looks like they are going to get there without DPF, just a question of when. Wow, i am glad i don't need a new tractor. Lot to chew on.

Here is my :2cents: do what you need to do to stay away from DPF. If you have DPF it is not the end of the world, it works just gets there differently. You needed a tractor that's all they had what is one to do. Money talks and BS walks, so if the price was right on a tractor with DPF compared to a new one without, i'd do it. But I sure would understand what I was getting into.

 

[Sysop]

Mahindra's efforts were not Mahindra's alone. I'd imagine the $30M was their share of the investment, but I'd imaging the overall investment in designing everything was actually much higher. Mahindra partnered with both Bosch and Perkins (possibly others) in designing the new no-DPF system (which they have had a very long and productive collaborative relationship with both companies for many years). I figure Perkins and Bosch both tossed dollars in the kitty to get it done also.

My older 4035 also has an engine that was a collaborative effort between Mahindra and Perkins and is outfitted with Bosch injection and emissions. One of the sillier reasons I like my Mahindra is that signature Perkins-type sound.

 

[joeu235]

I'm definitely not a rich person but I work for a multinational company. $30M is peanuts. My company's R&D budget is in the billions.

 

[Sysop]

It depends. The billions you speak of could be spread across many projects. Their $30M investment was a single project (what they're calling mCRD), and in the end, that $30M investment led to a development that is being applied to fewer engine models than are being taken out of service.

Rather than each tractor having an engine developed specifically for it (some engines were used in multiple models with different power ratings previously, but not to the extent of now), they now have multiple models from multiple series ranging from 30hp up to 50hp all using the same engine.

I do understand all the positives that come from doing such things. Logistically, financially, and mechanically I understand that everything they did improves the lineup, but having applied their development to fewer engines thusfar also shows that $30M didn't really buy a whole lot beyond the R&D. They still have major investments ahead applying the developments to more engines more specific to the tractors they're fitting them in.

Between what their partners sunk into it and what they still have to do, I don't think the $30M is fully accurate. It was just a dumbed down press release after all.

 

[McREBEL]

Obviously the biggest problem with Tier IV is the solution some manufacturers have chosen. As I say often where I work, "You see what kind of problems solutions cause".

DPF is going away and they are getting it figured out.

If this is true, and I suspect it is, then the resale value of these DPF tractors, that might only be produced for a few years, will not be so good whether the fear of them is truly warranted or not. The perception they are bad will probably be enough to hurt resale/trade value. That alone would be enough to make me avoid one. I can imagine the advice being given here some years down the road when someone asks for advice purchasing a used tractor..."Avoid this or that model, it has a DPF".

It seems like I have read on here recently that LS is about to start building their own engines that do not use DPF. Not sure if that is true or not.

 

[truckdiagnostics]

I would not let the resale of a tractor equipped with DPF worry me. I believe if a particular engine is having issues with the DPF or the DPF is to costly to repair, American ingenuity will come up with a way to delete it. They are doing it left and right in the over the road trucking and light truck. And as far as I know it is going unchecked, most inspections are visual they reflash the ecm and core out the DPF. One of two things are going to happen. The larger trucking companies which have to leave the DPF on and functioning are not going to be able to compete with the smaller companies from a pricing perspective, and the larger companies are going to throw the smaller ones under the bus. The the EPA is going to have a choice say we messed up and it is ok to take the DPF off, or they are going to have to go after the little guy. Now if you go back and read what I have been saying in this thread, you should be doing some real head scratching!

 

[dave1949]

I would not let the resale of a tractor equipped with DPF worry me. I believe if a particular engine is having issues with the DPF or the DPF is to costly to repair, American ingenuity will come up with a way to delete it. They are doing it left and right in the over the road trucking and light truck. And as far as I know it is going unchecked, most inspections are visual they reflash the ecm and core out the DPF. One of two things are going to happen. The larger trucking companies which have to leave the DPF on and functioning are not going to be able to compete with the smaller companies from a pricing perspective, and the larger companies are going to throw the smaller ones under the bus. The the EPA is going to have a choice say we messed up and it is ok to take the DPF off, or they are going to have to go after the little guy. Now if you go back and read what I have been saying in this thread, you should be doing some real head scratching!

I'm confused a bit by "... EPA is going to have a choice say we messed up and it is ok to take the DPF off ...".

My understanding is that the EPA set a standard to meet but didn't require any particular engineering solutions to achieve that standard. If that is true, then the EPA is not going to say they messed up for someone else's design and implementation.

 

[houstonscott]

I'm confused a bit by "... EPA is going to have a choice say we messed up and it is ok to take the DPF off ...". My understanding is that the EPA set a standard to meet but didn't require any particular engineering solutions to achieve that standard. If that is true, then the EPA is not going to say they messed up for someone else's design and implementation.

Maybe the next president will decide we just don't have the resources to enforce EPA regulations and will tell tractor manufactures they don't have to comply with EPA law, and the AG will ignore US law. HS

 

[Utopia Texas]

Maybe the next president will decide we just don't have the resources to enforce EPA regulations and will tell tractor manufactures they don't have to comply with EPA law, and the AG will ignore US law. HS

Scott, I want some of what ever you are smoking!

 

[mx1alex]

Scott, I want some of what ever you are smoking!

diesel fumes

 

[DavesTractor]

diesel fumes

Now that's funny whether you are a flaming liberal or the staunchest libertarian.

 

[Utopia Texas]

diesel fumes

Can't comply.
I am using Tier 4B and as you know the exhaust comes out cleaner than the intake air!
Everything I read on the Internet is true......