Comparison Tier IV Questions For Messicks

[s219]

Apparently (??) Kubota found a way to reduce particulate matter exhaust from the small displacement B2601 and B2650 engines so they meet Tire IV requirements with engineering/technology omitting a Diesel Particulate Filter. (DPF)


Can anyone expand on this?

They are exempt. There are also a whole bunch of Tier IV Interim machines that automatically meet Tier IV Final.

The biggest problem I see here on TBN is that there is a perception that the new Tier IV Final machines are special and everything before that was Tier III. But Tier III only applied to higher horsepower machines and only for a limited number of years. Most other compact tractors have been Tier IV Interim for many years. This chart has been helpful in separating things out:

For some reason, the horsepower cutoff is hazy among manufacturers, and it seems like more than the conversion/rounding from 19 kW to 25.479 HP. There are plenty of machines that are slightly over 19kW but meet the EPA cutoff for Tier IV Final without any emissions controls. It's a mystery unless there is some RPM limit that holds them back. For example, the Kubota L2501 has the old 34HP L3400 engine and it's simply RPM-governed to stay below Tier IV limits. How that is legal is something between Kubota and the EPA I guess. But it's a clever way for Kubota to sell a powerful torquey tractor that doesn't need any emissions controls.

 

[ericm979]

Just to clarify- there are emissions limits for Tier IV tractors under 19kW/25.5hp. They're easier to meet, so it's possible without added equipment. The manufacturers may do things like changing combustion chamber shape and injection timing to meet the limits but they don't need a DPF or DOC.

 

[majorwager]

In addition to what Eric noted above, the design of many 3 cylinder diesels, simply produces an inherently cleaner combustion result. Even in the higher hp models, a 3 cylinder provides an easier path to complience using DOC technology.

MF and others use this engine up to and including the 100 hp range because the design performs a portion of the stated goal.

 

[MessickFarmEqu]

Any worries about this are silly. No one should use emmissions as a buying factor. We sell every variation of emmissions and none are any better or more trouble free than any other. 90% of the issues with this stuff are operator induced.

 

[Steppenwolfe]

Any worries about this are silly. No one should use emmissions as a buying factor. We sell every variation of emmissions and none are any better or more trouble free than any other. 90% of the issues with this stuff are operator induced.

:thumbsup:

 

[3930dave]

Any worries about this are silly. No one should use emmissions as a buying factor. We sell every variation of emmissions and none are any better or more trouble free than any other. 90% of the issues with this stuff are operator induced.

Other than monkeying with (modifying) the emission system, what are operators doing to cause problems ?

Rgds, D.

 

[CincyFlyer]

I believe that it's got an EGR valve in it, and, they use DOC (basically a catalytic converter). The DOC is passive (don't think anything is monitored). EGR bits, however, require some controlling.

Yes. My 2540 has a catalytic converter (for passive after-treatment of the exhaust) and EGR (to control burn temperature), but no DPF (diesel particulate filter, which captures the soot and periodically burns it off by wasting fuel) or DEF system (diesel exhaust fluid, often used on automobiles and light trucks). It is smokeless except for a short period if you go from "chugging around" engine speed to PTO max, then it cleans up again.

 

[Goose69]

Any worries about this are silly. No one should use emmissions as a buying factor. We sell every variation of emmissions and none are any better or more trouble free than any other. 90% of the issues with this stuff are operator induced.

...By this reasoning, it would imply that one would want to look for whatever emissions systems require the least amount of input from the operator.

 

[jaydee325]

Other than monkeying with (modifying) the emission system, what are operators doing to cause problems ?

Rgds, D.

My empirical observation is that operators are trying to operate these machines at just above low idle RPM as it has always been done. Lugging these engines around causes excessive soot and problems. They equate high RPM operation as causing excess wear and fuel consumption.

These new engines are designed to be operated at PTO speed (or very near).

Just my humble opinion.

 

[majorwager]

Stating that an engine is DESIGNED to be operated at higher operation rpm's does NOT make it so.The manufacturers have NO choice but to sing the EPA mantra in order for their engines to function. Discounting engine wear and fuel consumption may very well be the naive perspective? My Kubota is tier lll, A or B, not sure, but it suits me just fine, Lower rpm's, I save fuel, Kubota tractors not renowned for their fuel economy, at lest not mine!

EDIT:

AGREE w/ OLDOAK.. Any backhoe task I ever attempted did NOT require full flow to the hoe. The machine becomes "Jerky" Always achieved smoother motions with the control valve using LESS than full hydraulic flow to the cylinders. Everyone should strive to achieve "smooth operator" status.