Tier 4 is comming... now is the time to get off the fence!

[hazmat ranger]

I'm as resistant to change as anyone. It seems crazy that they gum up such a simple, durable engine as a diesel with electronics. More points to fail, yet, they have been able to boost power and efficiency. Some of the mandates do force us to move forward.
Can't restrict the old equipment? California is regulating/eliminating any diesel engine in road use older than 2010.
Not sure where it's all headed but I don't feel like my son has it as good as I did....

 

[namesray]

If you look at the history of Tier I, II, III, and now IV, it has wreaked havoc on the over the road tractor diesel industry...
Freightliner has two plants located here in Mt. Holly and Cleveland...
Everytime a new tier is coming into effect the company has to hire workers and work overtime due to the freight companies buying a lot of tractors before the new regulations take place...
Once the regs take place and the new higher prices take effect then the business falls off to nothing...
They then go through the process of laying off a bunch of people they had to hire in order to get out the increased demand on the previous Tier regulations...
I am all for environmental protections but this madness has got to stop sometime...
Those yo-yo's in Washington are a bunch of blithering imbeciles and have no clue on how law effects employment until after the fact...

i couldn't agree more! i have seen the "bugs" with these new systems where i work at the state transportation dept. the regen systems are a pita! at least the initial systems until the "bugs" get worked out through trial and error so to say. our plow trucks in the winter that have these regen systems on them have to pull off the road to regenerate for up to 45 minutes. looks good in a snow storm for a plow truck to sit there just to regenerate, while the pre tier 4 trucks just keep going. with our macks i have seen quite a few issues go back for warrenty work on these systems.

the tier 4 final is the most stringent and drastic change yet by far, and for those who don't believe it will increase the cost of a new tractor, haven't researched it much. the $3000 EXTRA is about right and it is just more to go wrong. add computers and more to cram under the hood and you got more to break down. now i do believe over the years to come, companies will "fine tune" this stuff more and just by trial and having the systems out there being run and over the years will fine tune and work out the bugs. then i believe it would be ok to buy one, but not now, the bugs aren't worked out quite yet. many companies were and still are scrambling to figure it out and perfect it and it even put some companies out of the engine business.

these new tier 4 final standards made me make up my mind and buy now to advoid having it on my tractor. i now have a tractor that has technology that has been run and tested for years and fine tuned, not rushed to meet standards in time with all new technology un tested fully. i say if you are going to buy, buy now.

 

[MHarryE]

I assume everyone blaming the current administration for tier 4 noticed the regulation went into effect in 2004 when the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives were controlled by Republicans.

I had a 3 year European assignment and worried about fuel cost. Turned out it was a break even. My much better performing European diesel had so much better fuel economy than the American fuel hog I parted with my cost per mile was slightly better in Europe, and I am talking about 3 years of recording every liter and kilometer, comparing them with my history of gallons and miles and doing the conversion. Sure my 1970 Nova ran on leaded fuel, but it got 12. Mpg highway averaging slower speeds than my current car using unleaded that gets 30 mpg highway. Oil comes out of the same holes in the ground, the US uses less imported oil now than in 1970 when I bought my Nova. The Koch brothers are the ones who have ended up sitting fat and happy.

 

[Rainbody]

Did tractor companies get smart and make twice or three times the number of 2012? Knowing that 2013s would be a huge jump in price.
I just see the 2012s that are setting on the lot in 2013 going for above sticker price for those who don't want to play the tier 4 diesel restriction game. It would allow some breathing room for these guys instead of retooling to produce new engines for a regulation no longer in effect.
I can't imagine speeding HUGE amounts of capital on something that may or may not be necessary especially in this economy.

 

[300UGUY]

I assume everyone blaming the current administration for tier 4 noticed the regulation went into effect in 2004 when the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives were controlled by Republicans.

I had a 3 year European assignment and worried about fuel cost. Turned out it was a break even. My much better performing European diesel had so much better fuel economy than the American fuel hog I parted with my cost per mile was slightly better in Europe, and I am talking about 3 years of recording every liter and kilometer, comparing them with my history of gallons and miles and doing the conversion. Sure my 1970 Nova ran on leaded fuel, but it got 12. Mpg highway averaging slower speeds than my current car using unleaded that gets 30 mpg highway. Oil comes out of the same holes in the ground, the US uses less imported oil now than in 1970 when I bought my Nova. The Koch brothers are the ones who have ended up sitting fat and happy.

Facts and logic seldom prevail on the net.....

 

[300UGUY]

Tier 4 is an unrealistic approach to the problem. As pointed out, the CUT is more often an occasional use tool.

As an example, not quite 100% accurate but- A base model B3200 will have an almost 20 percent cost increase in price because of this.

So, when are the credits, assistance, subsidies coming through for this? By and large, people don't buy a tractor purely as a recreational device or "toy" (well mostly.....). Yet, The government sponsored "cash for clunkers" to subsidize and increase car sales. Which, IMHO allowed those who could afford to upgrade- the opportunity to do so and didn't do anything for the majority of the country let alone the environment.

The tractor industry will suffer from decreased sales, lower need for production and ultimately layoffs and closing of plants...never mind the number of dealerships that may fold up. When all this happens- will the government step in to bail them out and pump money into this just as they did the auto industry?

If this is such an important step to protect the environment, then it should be affordable and accessible to all. If there is such a demonstrable need to get polluting engines out of service, why are there ANY exemptions?

...I now turn the soapbox over to the next candidate-

Layoffs I don't wish on anyone. But none of these cuts are manufactured here. Deere might do some assembly here, but 90% of the parts are made elsewhere. I think you have to get into the 100hp class to get a US made tractor.

 

[boggen]

Over the next two years most tractors over 25Hp will move to Tier 4 emmissions. This is done with engine credits so most companies will have a phased approach. We're starting to see more details trickling in on whats changing, and while I can't really give specifics at this point, I just wanted to throw up the flag and say BUY NOW!. The price increase in your typical compact tractor is comming in at over $3000. You will get marginly better fuel economeny which in a high hour applications can pay for the cost difference, but those of us compact owners putting on 150hr/year will end up with nothing but a slew of computers and toxic heavy metals under the hood.

If anyone within 200 miles of 17022 whats a deal, email me while I can still have most everything. I am slightly concerned that this may start to push the price of some tractors out of the reach of our customers.

most new tractors the wiring harnesses alone in them is so complex, and trying to hunt down a pin / color of wire is very time consuming or less you have a computer with wiring diagram you can pull up quickly and easily. adding a couple extra things is not going to cause a much more complexity to wiring harnesses than what they already are.

i been behind way to many tractors to on road trucks. and was gasping for breathable air. when i was younger, things have been much much better in past years.

you just gotta wonder sometimes what folks were thinking when they did this or that, when building a tractor and placement of a muffler, as you drive into the wind. and get nothing but fumes. as you hold your breath and lean to the side, and your eyes water so much they are dry within a few minutes due to the fumes.

how many folks actually know how to fix a problem on current tractors? vs taking it into a repair shop on current machines? those folks that go with newer machine, and DIY the repair, i doubt there will be much of a large learning curve if hardly at all. seriously marketing for SCUTs and CUT owners. that more likely have a regular day job. vs using the tractor as part as the day job.

a new tractor, is always going to have the new gadgets and do dads, that come with it, big deal teir 4 doings with an engine. it is just part of getting something new. and sales and marketing folks always trying to make another buck as quickly as they can, vs letting things take time to pay for things.

 

[texasjohn]

Exactly

This means facts are hard to find on the net....infrequently they do exist.
Also, good logic is hard to find on the net......does exist, but rare.

Putting the two together in the same post....happens, but exceptionally rare.

Now, adding a political component to this and expecting the discussion to be based on facts AND logic....well, the truth is in the eye of the reader before the facts AND logic are presented, thus truth seems to be a personal and immutable verity with uncountable exceptions (so few that they are inconsequential).

Facts and logic seldom prevail on the net.....

 

[CBW1999]

Buy my low hour 2009 B3030 HSDCC now and avoid the substantial price increase! :laughing:

-Couldn't see that one coming!

CBW1999:
If this is such an important step to protect the environment, then it should be affordable and accessible to all. If there is such a demonstrable need to get polluting engines out of service, why are there ANY exemptions?

If you put a price on this EPA estimate (and accept it):
"These reductions in NOx and PM emissions from nonroad diesel engines will provide enormous public health benefits. EPA estimates that by 2030, controlling these emissions would annually prevent 12,000 premature deaths, 8,900 hospitalizations, and one million work days lost."

An "Estimate" of what will happen over 15-20 years?!?!?! Then why haven't we heard of this from the CDC? I have a hard time believing that estimate is worth the entire program. The CDC reports for 2009 almost 2.5 million deaths in the us. based on this, the diesel emission requirements will prevent 0.05% of the total deaths in the us. There is a clearer link between second hand smoke and lung cancer. Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the US so, why has there NOT been an entire ban on smoking?

NHSTA reports in 2010 almost 33000 deaths from traffic accidents. 32% of these involved alcohol. So..............

To go one further- In the first year of tier-4, if 1000 compliant units are purchased, that would be 3,000,000 dollars spent based on the increase. Wouldn't it be more prudent to find a use for that money that the CDC identifies as important. Aside- there are MANY things each americans can do to improve health and safety.

Layoffs I don't wish on anyone. But none of these cuts are manufactured here. Deere might do some assembly here, but 90% of the parts are made elsewhere. I think you have to get into the 100hp class to get a US made tractor.

Think global. Eventually this will effect the global economy. If we aren't buying, assembly slows/stops. Fewer imports of parts......factory slowdowns at the point of origin. Regardless, fewer purchases mean negative impact on the industry.

 

[dave1949]

-
An "Estimate" of what will happen over 15-20 years?!?!?! Then why haven't we heard of this from the CDC? I have a hard time believing that estimate is worth the entire program. The CDC reports for 2009 almost 2.5 million deaths in the us. based on this, the diesel emission requirements will prevent 0.05% of the total deaths in the us. There is a clearer link between second hand smoke and lung cancer. Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the US so, why has there NOT been an entire ban on smoking?

NHSTA reports in 2010 almost 33000 deaths from traffic accidents. 32% of these involved alcohol. So..............

To go one further- In the first year of tier-4, if 1000 compliant units are purchased, that would be 3,000,000 dollars spent based on the increase. Wouldn't it be more prudent to find a use for that money that the CDC identifies as important. Aside- there are MANY things each americans can do to improve health and safety.

The CDC hasn't been keeping secrets: Environments Air Contaminants - CDC Tracking Network The impact on health of particulates is an old topic.

The actions on smoking and lung cancer have long been aggressive using taxes, cessation programs and teen education. We do have a total ban on drugs, that works The government and insurance industry have made a lot of progress in making vehicles safer, so work is being done there.

But, bringing up deaths or health issues by other causes, to defend no preventive action on a cause you don't agree with is illogical. Do you really want me to believe you are satisfied with that logic?

One million lost work days each year, how to value that? It costs employers and employees. If you assign a very conservative value of $15 to an average lost work hour, a lost day is worth $120. A million of those is $120M per year from that alone. What are 12,000 premature deaths and 8,900 hospitalizations worth?

As I said, I don't pretend to know what is right. I know it's not cut and dried.

To have an informed useful opinion I would need at least some of these:
medical knowledge to understand and agree or disagree with the EPA health impact assessment.
knowledge of atmospheric chemistry.
to know if engine manufacturers are using the most cost efficient technology to meet the standards.
to understand the choice of SCR or EGR.
to understand advanced engine design.

Lacking all the above, I try to keep an open mind on these topics.

 

[CBW1999]

But, tier 4 is not being pushed by the CDC. Never said they were hiding anything.

But how did the EPA come to their conclusion that clearly, this effort will bring these results. I highly doubt that any certain scientific proof exists of this claim. Why do you say? Because they do not list specific causes of death and that emissions are the direct and only result. The same is applicable to hospitalizations and lost days at work.

The statistics I quoted were to point out that a significant amount of time and money have been spent on this program which address a very small to minute causation of these problems.

 

[Ductape]

Lacking all the above, I try to keep an open mind on these topics.

I thought your post was serious till I got to the bottom..........

 

[dave1949]

But, tier 4 is not being pushed by the CDC. Never said they were hiding anything.

But how did the EPA come to their conclusion that clearly, this effort will bring these results. I highly doubt that any certain scientific proof exists of this claim. Why do you say? Because they do not list specific causes of death and that emissions are the direct and only result. The same is applicable to hospitalizations and lost days at work.

The statistics I quoted were to point out that a significant amount of time and money have been spent on this program which address a very small to minute causation of these problems.

So, you don't know. You doubt. Therefore it is not a problem. That doesn't seem like an open mind :laughing:

The Tier 4 requirement, as I understand it, has already been applied to on-road engines. Now they are being applied to off-road. Collectively, those engines' emissions account for a very large portion of the health problems associated with particulates and nitrous oxides. You want small tractors excluded because they are not a major contributing factor- I guess that is what you are saying.

I could say one cigarette won't kill you, the thousands before it and after it might though. But statistically, that one cigarette could not be proven to do anything. Yet, we try to limit their use. One class of tractors is one in a sea of many millions of engines, like the one cigarette.

It just isn't practical to run around granting exceptions to this or that, you lose all control over the outcome. By the time the lobbyists got done with it, 500 hp "hobby" tractors would be in every AG operation. We do need to clean the air while adding millions of engines to the equation at the same time. There is nothing simple about the problem or the solution.

Politically, we have rejected high fuel costs as a method of reducing pollution. That doesn't leave much besides voluntarily reducing use (won't happen, my run to get milk is more important than others, can't live without my big vehicle), or making engines that have very low pollution.

It's hard to not come across poorly in these discussions. So, please don't think I am attacking you.

 

[CBW1999]

....What were you saying? My mind closed for business at 9pm-

It is a slippery slope. I do not automatically question authority but I don't always follow it blindly. "Because they say so" leads to sooooo many problems. Do I believe that emissions contribute to the problem- yes. But where is the clear data that supports them? The word "estimate" leaves lots of wiggle room Could be a lot more "saved" or a lot less. Otherwise, It is akin to "we think this effort might result in this result"

Again, subsidies for the smaller guy would be nice to offset the cost increase. Proportionally it increases the cost more than for the big guy. In addition since they have yet to provide hard data that supports it, it should be viewed as an unproven concept. If they are able to demonstrate their predictions as accurate great. BUT if we find out in 10 to 20 years that it hasn't made a difference are they going to refund the money they told me I had to spend?..... with interest?

Why shouldn't the government subsidize this? After all they dumped 80 BILLION into the failing auto industry. At 3000 each (CUT), the government would be able to pay for 1 MILLION tractors for less than 10 percent of that mentioned bailout.

 

[crazyal]

I assume everyone blaming the current administration for tier 4 noticed the regulation went into effect in 2004 when the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives were controlled by Republicans.

I had a 3 year European assignment and worried about fuel cost. Turned out it was a break even. My much better performing European diesel had so much better fuel economy than the American fuel hog I parted with my cost per mile was slightly better in Europe, and I am talking about 3 years of recording every liter and kilometer, comparing them with my history of gallons and miles and doing the conversion. Sure my 1970 Nova ran on leaded fuel, but it got 12. Mpg highway averaging slower speeds than my current car using unleaded that gets 30 mpg highway. Oil comes out of the same holes in the ground, the US uses less imported oil now than in 1970 when I bought my Nova. The Koch brothers are the ones who have ended up sitting fat and happy.

It's not who started it. I welcome anyone trying to make something better, or in this case, cleaner. I can accept growing pains that come with change. It's the person who will stubbornly not admit mistake and reverse course. This decision is keeping the small diesel car market on the sidelines. Who's going to pay $4k extra for a diesel VW that only gets 10 mpg more? Diesel fuel costs more as well as the added costs of operating a diesel engine negate any savings. So, yes, I blame the person in charge of the EPA for blindly pushing forward.

 

[crazyal]

So, you don't know. You doubt. Therefore it is not a problem. That doesn't seem like an open mind :laughing:

The Tier 4 requirement, as I understand it, has already been applied to on-road engines. Now they are being applied to off-road. Collectively, those engines' emissions account for a very large portion of the health problems associated with particulates and nitrous oxides. You want small tractors excluded because they are not a major contributing factor- I guess that is what you are saying.

I could say one cigarette won't kill you, the thousands before it and after it might though. But statistically, that one cigarette could not be proven to do anything. Yet, we try to limit their use. One class of tractors is one in a sea of many millions of engines, like the one cigarette.

It just isn't practical to run around granting exceptions to this or that, you lose all control over the outcome. By the time the lobbyists got done with it, 500 hp "hobby" tractors would be in every AG operation. We do need to clean the air while adding millions of engines to the equation at the same time. There is nothing simple about the problem or the solution.

Politically, we have rejected high fuel costs as a method of reducing pollution. That doesn't leave much besides voluntarily reducing use (won't happen, my run to get milk is more important than others, can't live without my big vehicle), or making engines that have very low pollution.

It's hard to not come across poorly in these discussions. So, please don't think I am attacking you.

You're not up to speed. CO2 is the new biggest threat to our planet. If so why would you want to push technology that actually puts more CO2 into the atmosphere per mile driven or hours of use?

 

[SSdoxie]

If you wish to read the study that was done in 1991 that is basis for these standards here is the link to all 141 pages.
http://www.epa.gov/nonroad/nrstudy.pdf
There is also another 415 pages of Appenixes to it. This was found on EPA webiste here:
http://www.epa.gov/nonroad/nrstudy.pdf

This affects any diesel engine over 25 HP (generators, compressors, portable welders, etc) not just a tractor.

 

[dave1949]

Have a little faith in science. Do you think there has been no improvement since Nixon signed the Clean Air Act Dec. 31, 1970? But all along the way there have always been people saying I doubt this or that, or that is someone else's fault and problem.

Negatives cannot be proven, but it is quite possible that without government mandates for cleaner air, many of our cities would be something like Beijing where they had to suspend industrial output to hold the Olympics.

Those mandates aren't some sort of conspiracy. They came about because citizens democratically elected people to office who promised to confront pollution, or were convinced by the evidence that action was needed.

I think the taxpayers are still on the hook for around $30B on the auto bailout. But again, you are mixing logical apples and oranges. What does bailing out an industry sector have to do with small tractor Tier 4 costs? If you want a small guy subsidy, install a solar or geothermal energy system.

The problem small tractor owners have is, we don't have a lobby group or PAC to look out for our interests in Washington DC What we need is the TBN SuperPac, and then the subsidies would roll in our direction.

 

[dave1949]

You're not up to speed. CO2 is the new biggest threat to our planet. If so why would you want to push technology that actually puts more CO2 into the atmosphere per mile driven or hours of use?

Well, speed me up. By how much more? Using which Tier 4 technology? Trade-offs? Links?

 

[aczlan]

Can a car be made to get 50 MPG, likely but I doubt the middle class will be able to afford one.

Its called a Jetta TDI. 48-50 MPG highway, mid 40s around town.
I have a 2003 example for sale if anyone is looking for one.

Aaron Z