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

 

[hutchman]

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:

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

 

[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: