• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

Uh oh ,watch those tuning "improvements"


stmitch

March 2011 STOTM Winner
MTOTM Winner
2011 Truck of The Year
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
2,293
Reaction score
655
Points
113
Location
Central Indiana
Vehicle Year
2000
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0
Transmission
Manual
Close but not quite. The auto makers didn't "support" the standards, they said they could meet them- at an estimated additional cost of $9000 on each vehicle. When the average new car cost around $25,000.
My point was that it was a collaborative effort that the car companies had a voice in. It wasn't some mandate that came from a single politician or government agency without thought or input from those who would be impacted by it. There are tons of people and entities with different political leanings, backgrounds and motivations that come together for these types of agreements.

Also, anybody spot the largest company missing from that list of auto manufacturers that helped to shape the legislation? VW, during the height of their "clean diesel" campaign. Hmmmmm.
 


scotts90ranger

Well-Known Member
RBV's on Boost
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
8,244
Reaction score
4,688
Points
113
Location
Dayton Oregon
Vehicle Year
1990, 1997
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Engine Size
2.3 Turbo
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
6
Tire Size
35"
Yeah, screw VW, they've caused me nothing but headache at work, it was a start of a whole bunch of unnecessary paperwork for companies actually trying to do the right thing...

For what it is I don't have a problem with the EPA, CARB on the other hand... I almost had an aneurism when I was asked by one of their reps what a "boosted application" was... it was in paperwork for a N/A engine that I was trying to make universal verbage...
 

bobbywalter

TRS Technical Staff
TRS Event Staff
V8 Engine Swap
TRS Technical Advisor
TRS Banner 2012-2015
TRS 20th Anniversary
Ugly Truck of Month
TRS Event Participant
TRS 25th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
23,502
Reaction score
4,705
Points
113
Location
woodhaven mi
Vehicle Year
1988
Make / Model
FORD mostly
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
BIGGER
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
sawzall?
Tire Size
33-44
My credo
it is easier to fix and understand than "her"
Diesel pollutants breakdown into two general groups:
1) Smog forming pollutants like NOx and Ammonia stay in the region they're produced. They negatively affect air quality and hurt people with breathing issues like asthma or COPD. US regs focused on NOx reduction over GHGs. This lead to cleaner air, likely at the expense of the environment.
2) Greenhouse gases like CO2, Methane, etc rise higher into the atmosphere and spread more globally than the smog forming pollutants and have more environmental concerns. These are the focus of climate activists. For a long time European regulations focused on GHG reduction over NOx and the air quality in their cities suffered a bunch as a result and humans suffered. (US and Euro regulations now have much more overlap focusing on both smog forming and GHG emissions).

If you reduce the emissions output one category or particular compound, it often results in increases in one of the other compounds. For example, lean burn will reduce fuel consumption and GHG emissions, but it increases NOx and hurts air quality. If you increase fueling to cool the combustion, then you reduce fuel economy and increase sooty particulate emissions. There's a very delicate balance that OEMs have to strike depending on the application and region where it will be sold.

I pay my bills doing emissions systems development on diesel engines. My company spends literal billions of dollars each year on this stuff to make sure they're compliant with regulations while still offering as much quality and performance as possible. Jim Bob with a laptop isn't doing anything better when he illegally defeats emissions systems. He hasn't figured out a trick to make them cleaner than the OEMs and there's no secret piston design that OEMs are ignoring that would prevent the need for DPF/SCR/EGR systems. If there were a simpler, less expensive, more reliable way to meet emissions regulations without completely neutering the engines OEMs would sign up and pay handsomely for the privilege. If you've got better ideas, and can prove that they work, it would literally be worth hundreds of millions of dollars per year.

There's actual proof that these regulations have cleaned up the air and water. And there's actual evidence that diesel engines have gotten far more powerful since emissions regulations have been enforced. That's not a coincidence. A modern diesel that's had it's emissions systems defeated can easily have tailpipe emissions equivalent to hundreds of stock diesels. They're often worse than the old diesels that had no emissions systems at all. It's no joke, and the "coal rollers" have abused the situation and made it visible enough that it's become a high priority. It's been a priority for a few years now, and it's going to spread into a lot of areas.

All that said, nothing is perfect and these emissions systems are no exception. Lots of people that have issues should probably be buying a more appropriate tool for the job. I see lots of trucks and buses switching to other fuel types around here, and my company is investing heavily into alternative energy options and non-diesel fuels that require less hardware to meet emissions regulations. Diesel is a dirty fuel by nature, and the regulations only get tighter with time. It's going to be decades before diesel is replaced as the primary fuel of "work", but it's being used less and less every day as people choose alternatives.

I have to deal with emissions compliance too. In heavy oilfield equipment ....and have been waiting 4 years for the results of what's on the market now...pending a 15 liter run past the 40 liter engines.. And there most certainly is piston technology that will change the capacity of existing engines. And it's not vaporware to the best I can tell. Our next three builds are in negotiations.


I would agree in regards to diesel...Nox is the main issue. But the current methods of def use sure as hell are not cleaner with the failure rates that occur. If your increasing pounds per given hour of fuel consumed, especially for idle time....you are increasing emissions.

VW.... Still make more power and get better economy at whatever spec level is required to be met for emissions. They are awesome little engines. But end up with a shorter life generally with modern devices.

All of these diesel engines with the rube Goldberg systems on them, do not last as long and are not cost effective and are pathetic in reliability. They are harming our productivity in the energy field...and this failure is intended and used as incentive....yes it is a disguised tax to choose and develope other methodology...

Which .. well frankly ...on its face in intent....is not so bad. I like clean air.....and early acert level soot air so far, is way easier to breathe then urea air .....

And most certainly.....bubba with a laptop can definitely beat the oem emissions and economy capacity. They are built for mass markets.....not enough for some places and much more then needed for others. This happens every day. Hennessy could put 4 digit power down with emissions compliance decades ago. That was enough for me to accept those standards.

So yeah ... Not a lot of hate here for modern catalytic converters.


And then there are those of us that take our right to freely travel seriously.

My custom built custom titled vehicle can meet a specific standard with mega squirt. It's my private conveyance. The fact I would even attempt to keep it clean is fair enough. And there is no reason not to try to..

The modern muscle cars have proved that. 800 plus horsepower...awesome times....the cadi ct5....in a manual....wow. hell of a family truxster

And Toyota leading the way with hydrogen is much better then batteries from a clean world perspective.

I was never a big coal roller fan. Always a banks fan....save for bitching about the well deserved cost of their stuff..

He has always been emissions centric in regards to diesel.
 

stmitch

March 2011 STOTM Winner
MTOTM Winner
2011 Truck of The Year
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
2,293
Reaction score
655
Points
113
Location
Central Indiana
Vehicle Year
2000
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0
Transmission
Manual
At it's most basic, what comes out of the tailpipe is just chemistry. The chemical compound of the fuel, mixed with air during combustion, and the resulting chemical compounds. A piston redesign doesn't change that. You can alter emissions by playing with fuel injection timing/amount but that's going to have impacts on performance, fuel economy, knock and emissions of other compounds. Reducing NOx often leads to more soot/higher CO2 for example. Or vice versa. A piston redesign might change flame propagation and burn rates, but you'd still need a way to clean up the exhaust (even for more lax off-highway applications).

For what it's worth, engines still have to meet emissions regulations including times when they're burning more fuel during regen. So just because they use more fuel at times during their operation doesn't mean they're exceeding standards or putting out more than unregulated diesels.

Engine makers are constantly balancing performance, fuel efficiency, emissions, and reliability. Billy Bob with a laptop might do better in one or two of those areas, but not all of them, and it probably hurts one of the other aspects. If he's got it all figured out and can actually do it better than billion dollar corporations, then he could have a much more lucrative career working for an engine maker than he likely does doing illegal tunes/deletes.
 

funguy26

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2020
Messages
71
Reaction score
11
Points
8
Location
Dilkon,az
Vehicle Year
2001
Make / Model
Ford Ranger XLT
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
245/75R16
@stmitch
no one is counting the countless DEF boxes and bottles sitting next to the trash can.
 

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
TRS Event Staff
TRS Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
VAGABOND
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
32,471
Reaction score
18,228
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
@stmitch
no one is counting the countless DEF boxes and bottles sitting next to the trash can.
I have a $3500 converter off a '22 Ram sitting outside my office door waiting on warranty to clear it for disposal...
 

stmitch

March 2011 STOTM Winner
MTOTM Winner
2011 Truck of The Year
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
2,293
Reaction score
655
Points
113
Location
Central Indiana
Vehicle Year
2000
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0
Transmission
Manual
@stmitch
no one is counting the countless DEF boxes and bottles sitting next to the trash can.
I'm not sure what the argument is here? Are you saying that tailpipe emissions shouldn't be regulated because people can't be trusted to properly dispose of litter? What percentage of DEF do you think is purchased in packaging vs out of a pump?

DEF containers laying around are obviously bad, but that's the responsibility of the end user to properly dispose of them. They're also not causing air pollution while they sit wherever these careless people have left them.

This is a board about pick up trucks, so I can understand having a focus on personal trucks but most of the DEF that's consumed is used in heavy duty vehicles operated by businesses and governments, not in pickup trucks by general consumers. Those businesses and governments aren't buying DEF in a box or jug from Wally World they're pumping it into tanks at truck stops, etc.
 

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
TRS Event Staff
TRS Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
VAGABOND
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
32,471
Reaction score
18,228
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
Most people either buy the stuff at pumps or have bulk tanks.
 

funguy26

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2020
Messages
71
Reaction score
11
Points
8
Location
Dilkon,az
Vehicle Year
2001
Make / Model
Ford Ranger XLT
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
245/75R16
I'm not sure what the argument is here? Are you saying that tailpipe emissions shouldn't be regulated because people can't be trusted to properly dispose of litter? What percentage of DEF do you think is purchased in packaging vs out of a pump?

DEF containers laying around are obviously bad, but that's the responsibility of the end user to properly dispose of them. They're also not causing air pollution while they sit wherever these careless people have left them.

This is a board about pick up trucks, so I can understand having a focus on personal trucks but most of the DEF that's consumed is used in heavy duty vehicles operated by businesses and governments, not in pickup trucks by general consumers. Those businesses and governments aren't buying DEF in a box or jug from Wally World they're pumping it into tanks at truck stops, etc.
don't just count what's coming out of the Tailpipe, the effort it takes to build a vehicle. and are you guys working getting this to work without additional fuel, kind odd we need to burn fuel to save the earth the fuel is not being used to move the vehicle just to heat up a honey cone from my point of view is just waste. or a way to make replacement filters alot more affordable? $8,000 for a replacement that's a ouch.
 

stmitch

March 2011 STOTM Winner
MTOTM Winner
2011 Truck of The Year
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
2,293
Reaction score
655
Points
113
Location
Central Indiana
Vehicle Year
2000
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0
Transmission
Manual
don't just count what's coming out of the Tailpipe, the effort it takes to build a vehicle. and are you guys working getting this to work without additional fuel, kind odd we need to burn fuel to save the earth the fuel is not being used to move the vehicle just to heat up a honey cone from my point of view is just waste. or a way to make replacement filters alot more affordable? $8,000 for a replacement that's a ouch.
Trust me, fuel efficiency is massively important to anybody doing this kind of work. People that buy hundreds of diesel trucks at a time often make purchasing decisions based on 1% fuel economy differences. A fraction of a single MPG can be financially significant when you've got a fleet of trucks that each do 100k miles per year. Modern trucks tend to have much better BSFC than older ones, even with regen situations included. Nobody is burning more fuel than they absolutely have to. Regen frequency has a lot to do with specific duty cycles and the habits of the operators. Over the road trucks that work hard and do lots of miles don't have issues as often as suburban dads that commute in their Canyoneros in relatively short trips with little work being done. One of those duty cycles is an incorrect usage of the tool, and (like any improperly used tool) the operator pays for that with increased maintenance and headaches.

When an engine is being developed, the highest priority is meeting emissions requirements. If you can't meet those for the intended market, then you can't sell your engine so that's always the top priority. After that comes fuel efficiency, performance, reliability, and cost. The last ones can be switched around in some cases, but for any on road vehicle in the US that's typically the order of prioritization.

There's always work being done to make total cost of ownership lower, whether that's reducing fluid consumption, extending service intervals, reducing part costs, etc. A person using our engines in a garbage truck in LA might see no issues, while a person using the same engine in a school bus in Denver could see major headaches. They try to address specific duty cycles or customers that seem to be problematic, but it takes time and money to work it all out. They're better now than they were when DPFs were brand new. And that's with standards getting tighter all the time.

Diesels are increasingly costly and complex. Gassers are getting better all the time, and other cleaner fuel types are only going to grow their market share as it gets more and more difficult to clean up diesel enough to meet emissions standards and remain reliable. It's up to OEMs to develop the best products they can, and it's up to consumers to choose the most appropriate tool for their usage.
 

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
TRS Event Staff
TRS Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
VAGABOND
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
32,471
Reaction score
18,228
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
There's always work being done to make total cost of ownership lower, whether that's reducing fluid consumption, extending service intervals, reducing part costs, etc.
:icon_confused:

No like you said, they gotta keep the feds happy first. The rest of it is smoke and mirrors aside from parts costs which is for the most part crazy.

Most of the more common parts I am ordering day to day was off the radar 10-15 years ago if it even existed.

With the "extended service intervals" come more and more boutique oils which cost more than traditional oil. And generally for dirty/extreme environments the interval is about the same as it always has been... so it comes out as a wash for interval but with more expensive oil.

IMO the only thing they are doing right now to reduce ownership costs is decontenting. Basically putting less chips in the bag for the same price. No LED headlights, no fender flares, no chrome door handles etc.

I am mildly curious how close a middle of the road half ton will be to $100k by the time I am in the market again in about 5 years.
 

sgtsandman

Aircraft Fuel Tank Diver
TRS Forum Moderator
U.S. Military - Active
TRS 20th Anniversary
TRS Event Participant
Ham Radio Operator
GMRS Radio License
TRS 25th Anniversary
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
13,088
Reaction score
13,096
Points
113
Location
Aliquippa, PA
Vehicle Year
2011/2019
Make / Model
Ranger XLT/FX4
Engine Size
4.0 SOHC/2.3 Ecoboost
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
Pre-2008 lift/Stock
Tire Size
31X10.5R15/265/65R17
Lubricating oils have gotten better over time as has the engineering of the driveline. So, the ability to extend service intervals has some merit. That being said, I think they are pushing them too far in the name of reducing cost to the consumer. Sure the vehicle will last until the warranty is up and maybe then some, if the customer sticks to it but I think long term the vehicle will break sooner and not last as long as a result. With the way many people go through vehicles, the average consumer probably won’t even notice. The second hand owner will though.

As far as the emissions standards, those are agenda driven based off what the vehicle manufacturers can be coerced into meeting. Cleaner air is always a good thing. So, I’m not bashing the intent. I’m just not sure how well the pushed agenda is thought out and how much of it is emotionally based. Especially when it comes to the cost of fixing something that is broke that is part of the emissions system. Some of that stuff is pretty darn expensive, especially if you are buying OEM.
 

bobbywalter

TRS Technical Staff
TRS Event Staff
V8 Engine Swap
TRS Technical Advisor
TRS Banner 2012-2015
TRS 20th Anniversary
Ugly Truck of Month
TRS Event Participant
TRS 25th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
23,502
Reaction score
4,705
Points
113
Location
woodhaven mi
Vehicle Year
1988
Make / Model
FORD mostly
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
BIGGER
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
sawzall?
Tire Size
33-44
My credo
it is easier to fix and understand than "her"
At it's most basic, what comes out of the tailpipe is just chemistry. The chemical compound of the fuel, mixed with air during combustion, and the resulting chemical compounds. A piston redesign doesn't change that. You can alter emissions by playing with fuel injection timing/amount but that's going to have impacts on performance, fuel economy, knock and emissions of other compounds. Reducing NOx often leads to more soot/higher CO2 for example. Or vice versa. A piston redesign might change flame propagation and burn rates, but you'd still need a way to clean up the exhaust (even for more lax off-highway applications).

For what it's worth, engines still have to meet emissions regulations including times when they're burning more fuel during regen. So just because they use more fuel at times during their operation doesn't mean they're exceeding standards or putting out more than unregulated diesels.

Engine makers are constantly balancing performance, fuel efficiency, emissions, and reliability. Billy Bob with a laptop might do better in one or two of those areas, but not all of them, and it probably hurts one of the other aspects. If he's got it all figured out and can actually do it better than billion dollar corporations, then he could have a much more lucrative career working for an engine maker than he likely does doing illegal tunes/deletes.

Flame front propagation is everything. Efficiency improvement there is a win overall.


The test cycle for urea is bullshit. You are teaching to a test and pretending it's a win in regards to emissions. Only the government can do that .... And get away with it. When you burn a pound of diesel you get x amount of co2. Soot is soot. Trapping particulates actual verse the cost of the extra fuel and urea isn't winning. Anything saved is negated by one premature replacement.

The cradle to grave cost in both operation and energy resources of a new truck is higher then a first gen ... Say acert unit in emissions and fuel used when the emissions from the urea production is is involved

The new pistons are going to change this as they greatly reduce the cycle time needed with the modern machines.

To say the least...
To think....say any billion dollar company like ford, knows wtf they are doing.....I submit to you.....the second gen 7.3....the 6.0....and the 6.4.


Reliability just kept going down.

But there are in fact components companies that can make those mills more efficient and cleaner then they ever were off the line.


The Scorpion.... eventually was reliable. And uhh...study of aftermarket solutions went a LOOOOOONG way towards ford finally getting it right.
 

00t444e

Active Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Messages
326
Reaction score
217
Points
43
Location
Southern OH
Vehicle Year
2003
Make / Model
Ranger ext cab
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Deleting is the best thing you can do for a modern duesel and with good tuning they still run cleaner than older ones once deleted.
 

snoranger

Professional money waster
TRS Event Staff
TRS Forum Moderator
Supporting Member
Article Contributor
RBV's on Boost
ASE Certified Tech
VAGABOND
TRS Event Participant
GMRS Radio License
TRS 25th Anniversary
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
13,154
Reaction score
13,869
Points
113
Location
Jackson, NJ
Vehicle Year
'79,'94,'02,'23
Make / Model
All Fords
Engine Type
2.3 EcoBoost
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
My credo
I didn't ask for your life story, just answer the question!
The new pistons are going to change this as they greatly reduce the cycle time needed with the modern machines.
We had a Cummins engineer come in last year for training. He was telling us they had new clean burn technology in the works and testing phase that can do away with all the after treatment BS. He wouldn’t (maybe couldn’t) say anything else about it.
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Staff online

Members online

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Truck of The Month


XLTsplash
June Truck of The Month

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Events

25th Anniversary Sponsors

Check Out The TRS Store


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Top