Any news on gas engine CUTS?

[k0ua]

Diesel is not cheaper than gas here, but the gap between them has narrowed considerably.
Gas is about 15 cents cheaper than diesel, and the gap used to be around a dollar.

 

[buickanddeere]

If the EPA goes ahead with Tier V diesel emissions, probably. Manufactures also consider there is a market outside of North America and western Europe. Where diesel is cheaper than gasoline and emission regulations are limited.
It's currently more profitable to build all diesel and charge extra to the deep pocketed North Americans and western Europeans to scrub to Tier IV.

 

[buickanddeere]

Diesel is not cheaper than gas here, but the gap between them has narrowed considerably.
Gas is about 15 cents cheaper than diesel, and the gap used to be around a dollar.

Instead of comparing diesel to gasoline cost per gallon. We should be comparing cost per btu of energy.

 

[GManBart]

Instead of comparing diesel to gasoline cost per gallon. We should be comparing cost per btu of energy.

That actually makes diesel look even better.

A gallon of regular unleaded gasoline has approximately 114,000BTU. #2 diesel is around 129,500 BTU per gallon. Diesel engines are more efficient...at the very least 15% more when you compare state-of-the-art models of both types. Diesel costs the same, or less than regular now...even though some folks said it would never happen again.

Another station nearby.....diesel less expensive than regular unleaded, just like I predicted earlier in this thread.

 

[kenmac]

Gasoline here is $2.41 per gallon... Diesel is $2.69 per gallon

 

[mikeharold]

Diesel just dropped another $.04 today and is down to $2.95 while regular is at $3.54 or so.

 

[AxleHub]

Greetings,

Coming into this thread in the middle and noted all this diesel price vs. Gasoline price is not related to epa as a primary cause.

We all know oil has dropped in price . . we also know it is earlier cheaper processing to make diesel vs later processing to make gasoline (plus the regional gas additives required in chicago and california). But the demand for diesel has dropped not in the U.S. but in China who was soaking up diesel for 20 years as fast as it was produced.

Everything in china runs on diesel . . but china's consumption needs have dropped greatly as their economy and their construction industry have both cooled off incredibly. China created the famous "diesel gap" from 2003 to 2013 where diesel was as high as 80 + cents above gas pricing. The exact same condition and situation existed for concrete powder . . China was using 47% of all the concrete powder the U.S. was producing until 2013.

 

[mo1]

I think that a gasoline-engined subcompact or compact tractor just might make sense.

- The cost of a modern fuel-injected, water-cooled industrial-grade gasoline engine of the same torque output is somewhat to considerably less than a current Tier IV diesel engine, particularly units rated at over 25 hp that have to use a DPF or DOC/SCR.

- Gasoline engines have a better power to weight ratio and power-to-size ratio than diesel engines. This is important in applications such as a SCUTs and CUTs where size and weight are factors.

- Fuel-injected gasoline engines start better in extremely cold weather compared to diesels since you have a volatile fuel and a spark to light it off versus relying on heat alone to combust a much less volatile fuel. However, most modern diesels in good repair have few starting issues in all but the absolute coldest weather. My Massey's old-school mechanical IDI diesel has no trouble starting in mildly cold weather (single digits) as it's in good repair and all of the glow plugs work well. But it doesn't fire up with doing nothing more than cranking one crank and immediately run smooth as butter like my F-150 in that weather.

- Offroad 4-stroke gasoline engines currently have very few emissions restrictions on them compared to offroad diesels with the recent EPA Tier IV regulations. This is especially true with the over 25 HP units which now require either a DPF or SCR/DOC for particulate emissions and the requisite electronic engine controls that go with them. Gasoline engines' emissions controls for on-road vehicles are far more mature and reliable than those for on-road and Tier IV off-road diesels. On-road gasoline engines have had to deal with some emissions regs since the mid-1960s and a bunch of regs since the early 1970s with significant changes to the fuel composition as well. The technology stank at first but by the late 1980s the kinks got worked out and there is little trouble with gasoline engine emissions equipment today. Diesels are just starting to go through the same thing; they are about at the same level of maturity as gasoline engines' emissions controls were in the mid to late 1970s. If the EPA ever decides to tighten off-road gasoline engine emissions to match that of on-road engines, the required equipment is very well-known, reliable, and less expensive than the diesel counterparts.

- Reliability of modern fuel-injected gasoline engines is excellent and the rest of the tractor will wear out before the tractor does...just like in your car. I'd expect the hydrostatic transmission to be the first thing to wear out on a SCUT/CUT anyway. This is even true at heavy loads- look at ZTRs. If gassers could not handle sustained full-load operation you would see zero ZTRs with gasoline engines, but yet there are a lot of them with gasoline engines being used commercially.

- Fuel consumption will be higher with a gasoline engine but few SCUT/CUT operators run their units enough to use enough fuel to have paid for the price difference compared to getting the diesel version. The fact that diesel fuel has been more expensive both in price per gallon and price per BTU during nearly all of the last decade makes that even tougher to accomplish.

- I think most of the ill will directed towards gasser tractors is because of two things- comparing a far smaller displacement gasoline engine to a diesel engine of the same HP and also comparing a modern diesel tractor to a 50-year old carb-and-points gasser tractor. Your 1.1 liter 25 hp diesel will make a lot more torque than a 750 cc 25 hp V-twin gasser, so it has more power. Apples to apples would be to compare engines with similar torque outputs if not similar displacement. The gasser would be making considerably more HP if you compared similar torque-rated engines, and if it's the same displacement, much more HP and torque.

- The economics change greatly when you start to talk about row-crop tractors with 150+ hp engines that all are turbocharged and the operators put on many hundreds of hours a year. That's why we don't have large gasser tractors any more and I think the trickle-down "if it works for the larger guys, it will work for the smaller ones too" is why we don't have small gassers any more. There is also a bad reputation from the past regarding gasser tractors. The 1960s and 1970s diesel row-crop tractors being much better than the gassers stuck in people's minds just like the terrible 1970s and 1980s car diesels stuck in American motorists' minds and why we have very few passenger-car diesel engines.

Personally I would be very willing to buy a gasoline-engined SCUT/CUT over a current Tier IV diesel unit if one were offered.

 

[GManBart]

- Gasoline engines have a better power to weight ratio and power-to-size ratio than diesel engines. This is important in applications such as a SCUTs and CUTs where size and weight are factors.

Power to weight makes very little difference in tractors. Some of the old iron was extremely heavy for their HP ratings, and they still worked very well. Further, many/most CUTs are on the light side for the amount of power they have. Saving a couple of hundred pounds won't make them better machines...if anything, that's just more ballast you'll have to add.

- Reliability of modern fuel-injected gasoline engines is excellent and the rest of the tractor will wear out before the tractor does...just like in your car. I'd expect the hydrostatic transmission to be the first thing to wear out on a SCUT/CUT anyway. This is even true at heavy loads- look at ZTRs. If gassers could not handle sustained full-load operation you would see zero ZTRs with gasoline engines, but yet there are a lot of them with gasoline engines being used commercially.

Tractors aren't cars/light trucks, and they make for a poor comparison. Cars/light trucks, with any engine setup, are rarely run at high power settings for extended periods of time....hours on end. If you ran your car/truck with a gasoline engine at the equivalent of PTO speed, it wouldn't last long, because they aren't built for that kind of service. If you make a gasoline engine to withstand that level of use, it would cost nearly as much as a diesel. The best ZTRs have diesels, and that's what most commercial operators seem to be using around here. Regardless, the loads from spinning a couple of fairly small blades really don't compare to what we see with even small tractors.

- Fuel consumption will be higher with a gasoline engine but few SCUT/CUT operators run their units enough to use enough fuel to have paid for the price difference compared to getting the diesel version. The fact that diesel fuel has been more expensive both in price per gallon and price per BTU during nearly all of the last decade makes that even tougher to accomplish.

This is sort of a moot point. First off, diesel prices have normalized....the demand from China has dropped and the costs to upgrade refinery facilities for ULSD have been paid off. Diesel now costs roughly the same as gasoline in most places, and it's actually less expensive in quite a few places. Second, tractor manufacturers would have to spend a lot of money to develop and test gasoline engines for tractors, and those costs would take a long time to be amortized....so there's a risk on the part of the manufacturers, with very little potential gain. In fact, those costs would get passed on to the consumer, so the price gap between gas and diesel would likely shrink....especially after factoring in that the engines would have to be much more robust than automobile engines.

Then there's the reality check....the tractor manufacturers are extremely unlikely to sell any additional tractors if they suddenly offer a gasoline option. The same people are going to be buying the same number of tractors either way. There is no reason why they would take the risk, and added expensive of developing something that won't give them a higher profit margin, or increase their total sales numbers.

Short version: It's beyond unlikely we'll see a gas CUT/SCUT anytime soon.

Pretty much all of your points have been brought up before....I know it's a long read.

 

[mo1]

Power to weight makes very little difference in tractors. Some of the old iron was extremely heavy for their HP ratings, and they still worked very well. Further, many/most CUTs are on the light side for the amount of power they have. Saving a couple of hundred pounds won't make them better machines...if anything, that's just more ballast you'll have to add.

Depends on what you are going after. Weight is often the enemy for mowing as you want as little turf damage as possible. Ditto with any kind of operating in wet areas unless you want to make big ruts. Tillage however is the opposite, you want to have as much weight for as much traction as possible. Loader work is a mixed bag. You want enough weight to remain stable (hence counterweights) but it would be better if the weight were in the rear of the tractor rather than on the front.

Tractors aren't cars/light trucks, and they make for a poor comparison. Cars/light trucks, with any engine setup, are rarely run at high power settings for extended periods of time....hours on end. If you ran your car/truck with a gasoline engine at the equivalent of PTO speed, it wouldn't last long, because they aren't built for that kind of service. If you make a gasoline engine to withstand that level of use, it would cost nearly as much as a diesel.

No. Diesel engines in every other application cost more than analogous gasoline engines in the same usage scenario- generators, mowers, pumps, automobiles, light and medium duty trucks. Tractors would be no different.

There are gasoline engines designed to run at "PTO speed" all of the time- namely pump engines, commercial generator engines, inboard boat engines, and piston-powered aircraft engines. The big difference between those engines and an automotive engine is that they have a lower redline and thus a lower peak power rating. A car engine may redline at 6500 rpm but it is mainly designed to operate in the 2000-3000 rpm range. The industrial engines are simply governed at somewhere in that 2000-3000 rpm range...just like the diesel engines are.

The best ZTRs have diesels, and that's what most commercial operators seem to be using around here. Regardless, the loads from spinning a couple of fairly small blades really don't compare to what we see with even small tractors.

I see very few diesel ZTRs around here. Nearly all of them are gasser Deeres and Gravelys. Finish mowing is often the heaviest load people will put on a SCUT or CUT and it is absolutely a sustained load. You won't use 25 PTO HP doing loader work but you certainly can with a decent-sized mower. The fact that you can bog down a tractor with a mower speaks to the fact that they can take a lot of power to swing.

Then there's the reality check....the tractor manufacturers are extremely unlikely to sell any additional tractors if they suddenly offer a gasoline option. The same people are going to be buying the same number of tractors either way. There is no reason why they would take the risk, and added expensive of developing something that won't give them a higher profit margin, or increase their total sales numbers.

Short version: It's beyond unlikely we'll see a gas CUT/SCUT anytime soon.

^ Now that really is the bottom line of why we don't see any gas SCUTs/CUTs. I think there would be a market if they were offered, but I don't think it would really turn into additional sales.