Why doesn't Ford bring diesel Rangers to the US?

[ducarngr]

The reason is, it wouldn't be profitable. We have been on the verge of having a light diesel for years, but something always comes up. This isn't an easy market to build an engine for. Even the VW diesel left it for a couple years. They were sold on credits as well--you get credit for being under the limit in one area, so you can exceed it in another.

VW left the market because of the new CARB laws -- now that those rules are in place and people can see that diesel can meet CARB standards, it should change the perception.

And look at the prices for used Jeep Libertys with the CRD engine (from VM Motori in Italy) -- equivalent gasoline Libertys sell for 3-5000 less than the dsl version. People want diesel!

The diesels will have to meet the same standards as the gassers. The diesels need soot filters. The diesel's fuel costs more. Caterpillar is out of the truck market because they can't meet emissions for HD vehicles. That should tell you something. This isn't Europe or South America or Australia.

Exhaust filter is only one way of doing it, urea injection and a fwe other methods exist to eliminate soot. The big point is that everywhere gasoline is problematic, diesel excels (emissions wise).

In my area, diesel today was $3.24 whereas regular unleaded was $3.23. That is atypical for many areas, I know, but the price of diesel will drop as the market picks up and more vendors have it. My mileage in my 1986 TD Ranger is 25-30 city and my '05 VW Golf gets 32-38 in city driving, i'd say that extra penny was worth it. No gasser touches that mileage.

And even if dsl is 10-20% more than regular gas, the mileage and engine longevity makes up for it. Diesel engines go for 200-300k miles without hiccuping, very few gas engines will last that long. Plus, my oil change intervals are 10k miles. That should appeal to someone!

 

[Will]

CARB is not federal. But yes, they could not meet the standards--and weren't before. They were selling them on credits. The Jeep Liberty diesel is also dead in a ditch.

Urea injection lowers the Nox--nothing to do with soot. To get a diesel actually certified in the USA adds a lot of parts to a vehicle. The price doesn't look good by the time it reaches the dealership, and it's not a must-have as it is with a commercial customer.

Diesel isn't necessarily better than other options. My Honda Civic gets 39mpg driving around on county roads. My brother's Prius gets 49 highway and 60 in town. I'm definately a diesel fan having daily driven a diesel pickup for years. But I don't think it's ever going to be as popular as it is in Europe.

 

[Toreadorranger]

CARB is not federal. But yes, they could not meet the standards--and weren't before. They were selling them on credits. The Jeep Liberty diesel is also dead in a ditch.

Urea injection lowers the Nox--nothing to do with soot. To get a diesel actually certified in the USA adds a lot of parts to a vehicle. The price doesn't look good by the time it reaches the dealership, and it's not a must-have as it is with a commercial customer.

Diesel isn't necessarily better than other options. My Honda Civic gets 39mpg driving around on county roads. My brother's Prius gets 49 highway and 60 in town. I'm definately a diesel fan having daily driven a diesel pickup for years. But I don't think it's ever going to be as popular as it is in Europe.

Yea but I wouldn't have to look like my boyfriend is missing driving a diesel like your brother does driving his prius.

 

[Rulebreaker]

My 2005 F350 diesel still shows enough soot from acceleration to make the huggers cringe.

If they only knew why my 94 PSD smokes like an Iraqi oil well fire out of control they would all die of heart attacks! I think I'll go out and cut down some good tree's to offset all them tree huggers! LOL RB

 

[bobbywalter]

VW left the market because of the new CARB laws -- now that those rules are in place and people can see that diesel can meet CARB standards, it should change the perception.

And look at the prices for used Jeep Libertys with the CRD engine (from VM Motori in Italy) -- equivalent gasoline Libertys sell for 3-5000 less than the dsl version. People want diesel!



Exhaust filter is only one way of doing it, urea injection and a fwe other methods exist to eliminate soot. The big point is that everywhere gasoline is problematic, diesel excels (emissions wise).

In my area, diesel today was $3.24 whereas regular unleaded was $3.23. That is atypical for many areas, I know, but the price of diesel will drop as the market picks up and more vendors have it. My mileage in my 1986 TD Ranger is 25-30 city and my '05 VW Golf gets 32-38 in city driving, i'd say that extra penny was worth it. No gasser touches that mileage.

And even if dsl is 10-20% more than regular gas, the mileage and engine longevity makes up for it. Diesel engines go for 200-300k miles without hiccuping, very few gas engines will last that long. Plus, my oil change intervals are 10k miles. That should appeal to someone!

with the added complexities of modern diesels that factoid will be on hiatus for ahwhile. the old early psd and cummins on the other hand are definatly all of that and a keg of ying.

 

[grey ghost]

if ford was smart they would bring a few of their transit vans over and put a good hurting on the sprinter market..i'd sertanly buy one if they did

 

[thegoat4]

The diesels will have to meet the same standards as the gassers. The diesels need soot filters. The diesel's fuel costs more. Caterpillar is out of the truck market because they can't meet emissions for HD vehicles. That should tell you something. This isn't Europe or South America or Australia.

Well, Cat's been just about the worst engine maker for the last few years and has been cruising along on the sheer momentum of their reputation from the 80s/90s. In fact, they've failed emissions for years now and have been simply paying the fines.

Navistar (maker of the powerstroke) can meet emissions.
Cummins can meet emissions.
Mercedes/Detroit can meet emissions.
Volvo/Mack can meet emissions.
VW can meet emissions.
Toyota/Hino can meet emissions.
Even GMC/Isuzu can meet emissions.
I hear Mitsubishi also has a compliant engine, but I have not seen it.
As far as I know, Nissan/UD uses Hino's engines.

Not to say the emissions regulations are easy to meet; everyone is jumping through hoops to meet them. But Cat is pretty much alone in utterly failing as badly as they did.

Ford is making a big mistake by not marketing a diesel version of every truck. Out of all the people I know who own dodges, the vast majority got the truck for the diesel engine. Otherwise they'd be driving almost anything else. Some people even buy Chevys for their piece-of-shit duramaxes just because it's a diesel.

With everyone going broke any new vehicles will have new priorities: fuel economy, utility, durability. Diesels beat gassers on all of that. Bells, whistles, fluffy upholstery, and sun roofs are nice, but nobody will be paying for any of that crap for the next few years.

Around my part of Austin, I'm seeing more and more Rangers rolling around and fewer and fewer Tahoes, Suburbans, ugly-as-sin-Superduties, and sports cars. Virtually every ranger owner I talk with that uses his (or her) truck for work or towing and hauling comments on wanting a diesel option.

 

[Will]

One thing to note--Rangers don't have the same requirements as heavy pickups. Meeting an over-8,500# GVW standard is easier.

My wife (who is Director, Controls and Diagnostics, Advanced Engineering at Cummins) said they hosted the leader of the Prius project at Cummins for a hybrid discussion. He said it was a hard decision whether to have the Prius project be a straight diesel or a hybrid gasoline. The straight diesel can out perform the gas-electric and that the Prius is very well developed from ground up to meet its goals and stands alone among other hybrids.

I think the idea that diesels last millions of miles should be balanced against that fact that not all diesels are that long of lived. You give the example of a medium-duty truck engine lasting a million miles--yes. The 5.9L engine in my bus weighs 1,300# and only makes 185hp so if it doesn't outlive me I'll be pissed. But does a light-weight passenger car/ pick-up engine show that reliability? Your Ranger engine will have some aluminum in it, it will not be a 3.9 B-series Cummins. It will be a 400# thing. And it will be expensive.

I want these to be here and have been pining for it for years. I'm just saying why it hasn't arrived, and may not for another 2 or three years at best.

 

[Will]

One more thing about diesel prices--it will not lower as the market picks up. It has a much more stable price than gasoline because it's primarily an industrial fuel and gasoline is a consumer fuel. Consumers can decide to drive less and the demand is volatile. Diesel fuel use is stable because industry doesn't change its needs that quickly. You never wake up in the morning and see diesel has risen or dropped a dollar. It inches its way up or down but is steady where the gasoline price follows the screeches and wimpers of the newspaper headlines.

In fact, if diesel became a consumer fuel that might make life worse for us. Imagine if the truckers woke up and found they had to spend an extra three hundred bucks to fill their tanks because GWB decided to send an extra hundred medics to distribute seasonal flue vaccinations (Headline--US TROOPS SURGE INTO IRAQ TO BATTLE POTENTIAL INFLUENZA EPIDEMIC IN OIL PRODUCING GULF)

 

[thegoat4]

Yeah, I agree that squeezing a diesel into a Ranger as it is now would be very difficult. OTOH, I'd be happy to see a more heavily built Ranger with a GVWR to match. That would allow some compromise on emissions, but more importantly allow for the higher engine weight. Plus I want a work truck that isn't an oversized pig to park.

As for weight, I hear all of the makers are looking into aluminum blocks with iron liners. They already have aluminum bell housings, rocker boxes, valve covers, gear cases, and pistons. Really, on many of the engines they don't get very heavy until you bolt on all of the accessories and brackets. The most amazing contrast I've seen so far is a new DD15 on the stand vs. in the truck. On the stand it's a very clean engine with very little on the exterior. Once in the truck with everything bolted on it's about as messy and lumpy as any other.

Consumer vehicles do not need much power and the engines can be further reduced in size/weight and with correspondingly lower vibration the brackets and accessories can be lightened up. People won't be buying large amounts of excess horsepower anymore with fuel prices and wages the way they are. All of the medium and heavy truck fleets around here are derating and lowering road speeds to save fuel. Not many people are buying high power engines unless they actually need them. Yeah, it's commercial, but the consumer market is under the same pressures and they're people too, so the trends will be similar.

The smaller Isuzu engines even though all steel and very durable are light enough I can lift a short block with head by hand. Just not for very long. If I didn't absolutely despise the engine control electronics on those things I'd stick one in my Ranger.

I do agree with you that there are drawbacks and tradeoffs for Ford to consider before getting into the diesel business, but it's kind of a catch 22. Ford doesn't want to make diesels until they know there's a market, but the market can't really respond to the idea until the diesels are available. They should take the plunge because it will pay off. It has paid off for other OEMs every time it's been done.

Besides, if they can make it work now, with the economy in the dumps, they'll be in great shape once it turns around. GMC will likely fold soon they way they're going, so Ford would be even stronger.

 

[ducarngr]

CARB is not federal. But yes, they could not meet the standards--and weren't before. They were selling them on credits. The Jeep Liberty diesel is also dead in a ditch.

Yes, CARB is California, we all know that. My point was that car companies work to match CARB so they can sell cars there, the biggest car market in the US.

And you missed my point about the Jeep diesels.

The point was about demand for them. USED they sell for 3-5 thousand more htan a comparable gas version.

Urea injection lowers the Nox--nothing to do with soot. To get a diesel actually certified in the USA adds a lot of parts to a vehicle. The price doesn't look good by the time it reaches the dealership, and it's not a must-have as it is with a commercial customer.

my mistake, i mixed up the NOx and the soot. NOX was the real problem with the older diesels (well, post 2000, pre 2008) and what changed in the CARB regs in 2006 that VW stopped selling the PD engines and switched to the CR.

Diesel isn't necessarily better than other options. My Honda Civic gets 39mpg driving around on county roads. My brother's Prius gets 49 highway and 60 in town. I'm definately a diesel fan having daily driven a diesel pickup for years. But I don't think it's ever going to be as popular as it is in Europe.

My Golf gets 36 city and 46 on the highway and can pull a class 2 trailer no problem. I doubt either Civic or Prius can do that.

That's not for everyone of course.

However, the relative simplicity of a diesel engine versus the absurd complexity of the hybrids means the hybrids are a dead bird over time, IMHO. You don't see too many of the first gen Prius around nor the Honda hybrid, whatever it was called. People saw the repair bills out of warranty and dumped them.

 

[ducarngr]

One more thing about diesel prices--it will not lower as the market picks up. It has a much more stable price than gasoline because it's primarily an industrial fuel and gasoline is a consumer fuel. Consumers can decide to drive less and the demand is volatile. Diesel fuel use is stable because industry doesn't change its needs that quickly. You never wake up in the morning and see diesel has risen or dropped a dollar. It inches its way up or down but is steady where the gasoline price follows the screeches and wimpers of the newspaper headlines.

In fact, if diesel became a consumer fuel that might make life worse for us. Imagine if the truckers woke up and found they had to spend an extra three hundred bucks to fill their tanks because GWB decided to send an extra hundred medics to distribute seasonal flue vaccinations (Headline--US TROOPS SURGE INTO IRAQ TO BATTLE POTENTIAL INFLUENZA EPIDEMIC IN OIL PRODUCING GULF)

This is true if your only source of diesel is petroleum.

I use B20 in my VW and my Ranger and the performance is phenomenal. The only issue with the Ranger was needing to change the fuel filter. I also changed some of the fuel lines preventatively since biodiesel "cleans" the fuel system.

Biodiesel is not widely available yet, but it could be fairly quickly. The Navy offers B10 at their BXs (as well as E85 and NG fill ups, bleh)

The beauty of diesel is that it can be made from waste crops or any surplus crops: sugar cane, soybean, rapeseed, pine trees, and of course corn.

Rapeseed is the cheapest and least problematic to the food supply. In terms of energy per cc, biodiesel is no different from petrodiesel.

Plus, you can argue that biodiesel is a net CO2 user, rather than producer since the crops use C02 to grow and the engine does not exhaust it much.

 

[ducarngr]

I hear Mitsubishi also has a compliant engine, but I have not seen it.
As far as I know, Nissan/UD uses Hino's engines.

Mitsubishi's Astron engine. It is the 4D56 common rail version. Very nice engine, it is based on the 4D55 engine in my Ranger but updated quite a bit with a totally different fuel delivery. Also makes twice the hp and torque. Mitsu puts in in their current version Montero (?) outside the US.

Ford is making a big mistake by not marketing a diesel version of every truck. Out of all the people I know who own dodges, the vast majority got the truck for the diesel engine. Otherwise they'd be driving almost anything else. Some people even buy Chevys for their piece-of-shit duramaxes just because it's a diesel.

yep

Around my part of Austin, I'm seeing more and more Rangers rolling around and fewer and fewer Tahoes, Suburbans, ugly-as-sin-Superduties, and sports cars. Virtually every ranger owner I talk with that uses his (or her) truck for work or towing and hauling comments on wanting a diesel option.

Every time I pull up in Home Depot or Lowes, someone stops me and asks if my truck is diesel. They always end up saying "I would love a diesel Ranger"

The later model Rangers are big enough to use for most work and are small enough they get decent gas mileage. Put a diesel in them and you have the best of both worlds.

Look at the numbers of MPG for the UK Rangers, the 4x2 gets 27 city and 39 highway (2.5L turbodiesel) and the 4x4 gets 26/32. For the 4x2 that is 34 mpg combined (60/40 driving)

Don't tell me that if a Ranger with that mileage was sold in the US that it wouldn't sell!

The BEST mileage for the Ranger here in the US is 23/26 for a manual 2.3L gasser or 24 combined -- and that's the itty-bitty 2.3L non-turbo gasser. You gonna tow with that? Add auto trans and it goes to 19/24. Upgrade to a V6 and it goes to 16/21 or 19 combined. 19 MPG??!! Doesn't even break 20?

a lot of people would LOVE a Ranger that gets >30 mpg with the power of a diesel.

FYI my 22 year old Ranger diesel gets >25 city and >35 highway. My typical mpg is around 30 in mixed driving (about 50/50 for me)

 

[low_five]

duramaxes arent pieces of shit, by the way.

im calling BS on the CAT emissions/fines stuff too. please post evidence that they have paid fines since 2004.

 

[Green Mazda]

I talked to one of fords leadish engineers a year or so back, and he said that the emissions control over in the uk is much more leniant than here. The ford company HAD BEEN trying despertly,to figure out how to make the diesel ranger work over here. He said they had a whole team for it. But he said everything they do to make it pass the emmisons standards here, causes the deisel engine to not run properly, or slashes MPG and motor life span which then defeats the whole purpose of the diesel engine.

Also he did say that it WOULD be a competetor for the f-150, and since more and more people are going full-size since MPG is nearly the same in a 4.0L ranger and a base model F-150.
All in all he said the diesel ranger for us was in his opinion a lost cause, with so many going to cars and full size trucks.

It has been, like I said a year or so back. NO i don't remember his name nor do i still have copy of the e-mail, Just belive me when i say, that is what he said...OK

Hope this helps!