Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help




Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Diesel Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old 11-01-2004, 02:47 PM
whunter's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Metro Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 17,353
It takes money to:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jseries
What R&D money will be wasted? Can't say for Ford but DC's Jeep Grand Cherokees etc are all avail already w/dsl motors in Europe and have been for years. Even back when AMC owned Jeep the 80's era CJ's built in the US ran 4 cyl Suzy dsl but built for export only. US Cherokees had a 2.1L Renault dsl option in the mid 80's. Granted that was bad idea and didn't help the dsl image in the US at all. Point being there is no extra R&D money needed but there will be some marketing money required to wake up the US buyers.
#1. Design any engine to fit the engine compartment.
#2. GM and Ford will not buy engines outside, except for small production runs, they want to keep the money in house.
#3. Design a car transmission to function and survive a diesel, when driven by American John Q. public.
#4. Design for NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration).
#5. Design for service.
#6. Design for comfort and power.
#7. Design for planned obsolescence.
And on until you are nauseas.

Then you have the fun of trying to overcome the GM 350 diesel perception, the winter no start perception, the no acceleration power perception, the dirty black cloud perception and the smell perception.

But first you must approach the top executives with the idea, to get the R&D funds, which means risking your future with the corporation.
Hmmm, $189K per year job at risk to propose a radical engineering, manufacturing and advertising shift.
Remember, you will be walking into the meeting and from their view; trying to convince them their whole basic operations strategy is WRONG, would you be willing to put your financial future on the in danger?
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-01-2004, 03:15 PM
Waitn For The Bus All Day
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: south east pa.
Posts: 1,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by whunter
#1. Design any engine to fit the engine compartment.
#2. GM and Ford will not buy engines outside, except for small production runs, they want to keep the money in house.
#3. Design a car transmission to function and survive a diesel, when driven by American John Q. public.
#4. Design for NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration).
#5. Design for service.
#6. Design for comfort and power.
#7. Design for planned obsolescence.
And on until you are nauseas.

Then you have the fun of trying to overcome the GM 350 diesel perception, the winter no start perception, the no acceleration power perception, the dirty black cloud perception and the smell perception.

But first you must approach the top executives with the idea, to get the R&D funds, which means risking your future with the corporation.
Hmmm, $189K per year job at risk to propose a radical engineering, manufacturing and advertising shift.
Remember, you will be walking into the meeting and from their view; trying to convince them their whole basic operations strategy is WRONG, would you be willing to put your financial future on the in danger?
whunter-finally someone has answered a burning question I have had for years. What you've stated makes perfect sense. Thanks...

And too bad GM didn't do a better job. Maybe the publics perception of diesels will change once the memory of the 350 diesel fades. I've had a few 6.2's and their downfall, as far as I'm concerned ,seemed to be lack of power. I've also owned a couple 6.5's and their downfall is the IP, the very heart of the diesel motor. One 6.5 I had we put 3 IP's on and after the 3rd I sold it. Good power with the 6.5 though.

Don't know if the duramax will fare any better. Popped the hood on my buddys new Duramax and the first thing I saw was the aluminum head. Better take care of the cooloing system on those or big bucks to fix the warped head.

Cheers,

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-01-2004, 03:19 PM
boneheaddoctor's Avatar
Senior Benz fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hells half acre (Great Falls, Virginia)
Posts: 16,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill murrow
whunter-finally someone has answered a burning question I have had for years. What you've stated makes perfect sense. Thanks...

And too bad GM didn't do a better job. Maybe the publics perception of diesels will change once the memory of the 350 diesel fades. I've had a few 6.2's and their downfall, as far as I'm concerned ,seemed to be lack of power. I've also owned a couple 6.5's and their downfall is the IP, the very heart of the diesel motor. One 6.5 I had we put 3 IP's on and after the 3rd I sold it. Good power with the 6.5 though.

Don't know if the duramax will fare any better. Popped the hood on my buddys new Duramax and the first thing I saw was the aluminum head. Better take care of the cooloing system on those or big bucks to fix the warped head.

Cheers,

Bill
The 6.5 IP problem was the solid state driver amp, they overheated and caused falure......with aftermarket heat sinks they would last, without.....it was all a matter of time.
__________________
Proud owner of ....
1971 280SE W108
1979 300SD W116
1983 300D W123
1975 Ironhead Sportster chopper
1987 GMC 3/4 ton 4X4 Diesel
1989 Honda Civic (Heavily modified)
---------------------
Section 609 MVAC Certified
---------------------
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-01-2004, 03:21 PM
Jim B+
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
...and who wants MODERN diesels?

...the greatest asset of the MB passenger car diesel...which hit its epitome in the 1980s...was its SIMPLICITY and degree of overbuilding and robustness no other manufacturer saw fit to compete with.

IMHO, any "progress" that adds electronic stuff to the very basic diesel is in fact retrograde.

Believe SDs sold incredibly well in California before the state boys got 'em, denying MB a major market, and hastening the departure of MB diesels from these shores.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-01-2004, 11:31 PM
phantoms's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 794
Quit knocking GM 350 diesels. Those blocks made excellent bottom ends for a gasser 350 Olds engine . Extremely strong block for building a racing engine.


As for planned obsolescence, it's not just an American thing anymore. All the manufacturers do it. Even companies such as MB, BMW and Volvo do it. Build a car as cheap as you can and sell it for as much as you can, so what if it starts falling apart after a few years.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 11-02-2004, 01:50 AM
WannaWagon's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sacto.
Posts: 443
I love debates like this. Thx for starting it...

Here's some more fuel for the fire:

--The diesel problem in CA is off-road vehicles: semi-trucks, construction equipment, trains and the like. Just drive out to a housing subdivision under construction, a truck stop or railyard, and you'll know what I'm talking about (hack!). That's why even federal EPA decided to follow CARB's lead and mandate emissions reductions nationwide for off-road diesels starting in '07. It's about the only good thing the Bush EPA has done.

--Diesel cars are a tiny percentage of the fleet in CA, so small they never have to get smogged. The state figures they just don't matter in the big picture.

--In 2006, every diesel car in the world will be available in California, because ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel will appear, making it possible for all of them to meet CA emissions. CA is the biggest car market in the world, and none of the car makers will be able to resist. Neither will consumers, because gas will be $4 a gallon by then.

--ULSD can already be purchased at any BP or Arco station in CA. They decided to offer it ahead of the rules. Regulators didn't require it sooner than '06 because they're spineless.

--Most CA car consumers are morons. They want what Arnold Schwarzenegger or Britney Spears is driving, not what works for them. Cost won't matter until gas gets way more expensive. This may change when really cool, unique diesels start appearing. When you get a diesel on the market that performs and sets a trend like the new Prius (people are ransoming their children to get those out here) diesels could be huge.

--The rest of you have CA to thank for setting this trend. You may think air pollution is not your problem. You are wrong. Everyone breathes this cr*p, it just isn't quite bad enough to darken your skies every day. When automakers say pollution controls cost too much, they're really saying, "We don't care about your health. And by the way, how about a $5,000 rebate on this Suburban?"
__________________
'81 300TD turbo <<sold 12/05 to another diesel nut
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 11-02-2004, 08:33 AM
boneheaddoctor's Avatar
Senior Benz fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hells half acre (Great Falls, Virginia)
Posts: 16,007
And Like the Loons that support the Kyoto fiasco.........that doesen't apply to India and China...........where most of the worlds population lives and is generating far more pollution and greenhouse gasses than the USA does.

The Goverment needs to step in and tell The Peoples republic of Kalifornia that they are just a state and nothing more and they don't command squat.
__________________
Proud owner of ....
1971 280SE W108
1979 300SD W116
1983 300D W123
1975 Ironhead Sportster chopper
1987 GMC 3/4 ton 4X4 Diesel
1989 Honda Civic (Heavily modified)
---------------------
Section 609 MVAC Certified
---------------------
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 11-02-2004, 09:16 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milford, DE
Posts: 1,433
Oh please....

Hasn't the Federal government already told enough people what the can and can't do?!?@!$@$

I fully support the rights of the people in California to pass any environmental law they feel is needed to address local pollution issues - this is the way government should operate.

The auto manufacturers (with constant prodding from government regulators) have made absolutely amazing progress on the emission front, who knows what is possible in the future? Left to their own devices the car companies will certainly not continue the work on emissions reductions.

I'm not ready to move to California but I do look forward to what ULSD in 2007 will bring - maybe a C270CDI with a six speed?
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 11-02-2004, 09:20 AM
boneheaddoctor's Avatar
Senior Benz fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hells half acre (Great Falls, Virginia)
Posts: 16,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimFreeh
Oh please....

Hasn't the Federal government already told enough people what the can and can't do?!?@!$@$

I fully support the rights of the people in California to pass any environmental law they feel is needed to address local pollution issues - this is the way government should operate.

The auto manufacturers (with constant prodding from government regulators) have made absolutely amazing progress on the emission front, who knows what is possible in the future? Left to their own devices the car companies will certainly not continue the work on emissions reductions.

I'm not ready to move to California but I do look forward to what ULSD in 2007 will bring - maybe a C270CDI with a six speed?
And I am tired of Kalifornia trying to dictate what everyone else is going to do. When they try to make taxpayers pick up the tab for illegals medical and schooling costs instead of shipping them back. They have ego's that are WAY out of control.

If its not smog its..............................(fill in the blanks)
__________________
Proud owner of ....
1971 280SE W108
1979 300SD W116
1983 300D W123
1975 Ironhead Sportster chopper
1987 GMC 3/4 ton 4X4 Diesel
1989 Honda Civic (Heavily modified)
---------------------
Section 609 MVAC Certified
---------------------
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 11-02-2004, 09:45 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NE Okla
Posts: 1,104
There is one area of this whole discussion that has not really been covered, and that is the fuel itself. Yes the fact that US diesel is inferior (lower Cetane level) has been touched on, but the truth is a barrel of oil yields only a certain quantity of each of the various cuts. The amount of the diesel range is usually lower than the amount obtainable of the gasoline range. Some adjustments can be made but the main reason for Diesel prices going up significantly in the winter is the fact that the 'diesel' range has to cover vehicle fuel and home heating fuel. Remember that you often get what you wish for and then realize that it wasn't really what you wanted. Too many diesel vehicles will eventually eradicate the cost advantage that we have historically enjoyed.
__________________
1961 190Db retired
1968 220D/8 325,000
1983 300D 164,150
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 11-02-2004, 12:17 PM
mikemover's Avatar
All-seeing, all-knowing.
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 5,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lycoming-8
There is one area of this whole discussion that has not really been covered, and that is the fuel itself. Yes the fact that US diesel is inferior (lower Cetane level) has been touched on, but the truth is a barrel of oil yields only a certain quantity of each of the various cuts. The amount of the diesel range is usually lower than the amount obtainable of the gasoline range. Some adjustments can be made but the main reason for Diesel prices going up significantly in the winter is the fact that the 'diesel' range has to cover vehicle fuel and home heating fuel. Remember that you often get what you wish for and then realize that it wasn't really what you wanted. Too many diesel vehicles will eventually eradicate the cost advantage that we have historically enjoyed.
Legitmate points....but diesel engines will still have the advantage of greater durability and lower maintenance costs, and much lower CO2 emissions.

Mike
__________________
_____
1979 300 SD
350,000 miles
_____
1982 300D-gone---sold to a buddy
_____
1985 300TD
270,000 miles
_____
1994 E320
not my favorite, but the wife wanted it

www.myspace.com/mikemover
www.myspace.com/openskystudio
www.myspace.com/speedxband
www.myspace.com/openskyseparators
www.myspace.com/doubledrivemusic
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 11-02-2004, 12:23 PM
mikemover's Avatar
All-seeing, all-knowing.
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 5,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimFreeh
Oh please....

Hasn't the Federal government already told enough people what the can and can't do?!?@!$@$

I fully support the rights of the people in California to pass any environmental law they feel is needed to address local pollution issues - this is the way government should operate.

The auto manufacturers (with constant prodding from government regulators) have made absolutely amazing progress on the emission front, who knows what is possible in the future? Left to their own devices the car companies will certainly not continue the work on emissions reductions.

I'm not ready to move to California but I do look forward to what ULSD in 2007 will bring - maybe a C270CDI with a six speed?
Agreed. The federal government already hugely oversteps its bounds by infringing on states' rights to manage their own affairs. The medical marijuana issue is an ongoing example of this gross violation of states' rights by federal agencies.

The people of Kalifornia should have the right to pass whatever loony, over-the-top, radical environmental laws that they wish. It's their state. They are the ones that have to live with whatever environmental benefits it creates, as well as whatever economic consequences and personal limitations it creates.

The rest of us have the right to choose NOT to live there, and to NOT follow their lead.

Mike
__________________
_____
1979 300 SD
350,000 miles
_____
1982 300D-gone---sold to a buddy
_____
1985 300TD
270,000 miles
_____
1994 E320
not my favorite, but the wife wanted it

www.myspace.com/mikemover
www.myspace.com/openskystudio
www.myspace.com/speedxband
www.myspace.com/openskyseparators
www.myspace.com/doubledrivemusic
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 11-02-2004, 03:12 PM
WannaWagon's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sacto.
Posts: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lycoming-8
the truth is a barrel of oil yields only a certain quantity of each of the various cuts. The amount of the diesel range is usually lower than the amount obtainable of the gasoline range.
Not sure that's true, but I do know that diesel is easier to refine than gasoline. It requires less energy input to produce the finished product, thus less pollution to make. So in that sense it is a "cleaner" fuel. Engineers have what they call a "well-to-wheel" (WTW) measurement of energy to show the cost in dollars and pollution for different kinds of fuels, and the resulting energy output. Diesel has greater WTW efficiency than gasoline, and a diesel-electric hybrid has almost the same WTW efficiency as a hydrogen fuel cell car.

The excellent Dennis Simanaitis of Road & Track magazine had an excellent column on this subject several months ago.
__________________
'81 300TD turbo <<sold 12/05 to another diesel nut
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 11-02-2004, 04:52 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor
And Like the Loons that support the Kyoto fiasco.........that doesen't apply to India and China...........where most of the worlds population lives and is generating far more pollution and greenhouse gasses than the USA does.
This is a little off topic but I just wanted to correct you. USA is by far the biggest polluter on this planet, something like 30% of all greenhouse gas emissions, but India and China are big polluters too and I agree they should be included in the Kyoto Protocol.

Speaking about pollution, I believe the best thing anyone can do short of riding a bicycle is to get a light-duty diesel vehicle and run on pure biodiesel. That's hard to do as of now, but hopefully biodiesel will become cheaper and more available in the near future.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 11-02-2004, 05:00 PM
boneheaddoctor's Avatar
Senior Benz fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hells half acre (Great Falls, Virginia)
Posts: 16,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by DieselAddict
This is a little off topic but I just wanted to correct you. USA is by far the biggest polluter on this planet, something like 30% of all greenhouse gas emissions, but India and China are big polluters too and I agree they should be included in the Kyoto Protocol.

Speaking about pollution, I believe the best thing anyone can do short of riding a bicycle is to get a light-duty diesel vehicle and run on pure biodiesel. That's hard to do as of now, but hopefully biodiesel will become cheaper and more available in the near future.
Not so far off topic........that treaty is an enviro-nazi manifesto, practicly making it impossible to use motor vehicles.

China pollutes far more than the USA,(how many Billions live there?) they have no Pollution controls at all. Yet they are exempt, same with India, Both can use all the R-12 they want dump all they want and we have to get stuck with R-134. USA is larger and more sparesly populated than many and as such internal comustion engines are needed. And in those Diesel. Like The Peoples Republic of Kalifornia, they expect the rest of us to shoulder all of the burden, while exempting themselves.

Sort of like the UN.
__________________
Proud owner of ....
1971 280SE W108
1979 300SD W116
1983 300D W123
1975 Ironhead Sportster chopper
1987 GMC 3/4 ton 4X4 Diesel
1989 Honda Civic (Heavily modified)
---------------------
Section 609 MVAC Certified
---------------------
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page