2.8L Cummins Diesel Pickup

[Ardent]

Low quality hand tools are one thing; they look like the original, but fit, finish, function and quality of materials are lacking.

An entire car makes me nervous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5SRyG6UR2A

How long before they're powered by a "Chummins" instead?

[niky]

http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D1UnM-mKuCAw&rct

You'd be surprised. Two Chinese models have got four stars on the EuroNCAP. Early 2012 saw the Chinese NCAP standards raised to the same 64 kmh as EuroNCAP. Expect all 2013 models that get good Chinese NCAP ratings to actually be decent everywhere else.

I've been road testing new Chinese cars for several years at work. And while would not buy one, as yet, the improvement from year to year has been incredible. I give them less than ten years to be where Hyundai and Kia are at, rigt now, as long as the Chinese economy holds out.

[slowmover]

The key, as I see it, to a 1/2T diesel being a good choice will be with aero aids we're finally seeing on the rest of the line. I say this because truck aero and extra weight are a handicap even in pulling aero trailers compared to non-truck alternatives. The lack of independent suspension on trucks makes a Grand Cherokee a better tow vehicle in most all instances. That it also would have higher solo mpg makes the diesel, thus far, the better choice in that vehicle over a pickup truck.

The numbers shown thus far -- the teasers -- show low engine weight and high HP/TQ, but we'd need to see what the constant duty cycle is likely to be. The 6.7L Cummins is used in medium-duty, not just light-duty, trucks. Is the VM Motori just a scaled up car motor?(so to speak). I'd like to hope not.

Defining the load is more important than the vehicle envisioned to move it.

.

[niky]

It's a truck motor. It's common in Asia for working trucks with a 2 ton plus capacity tp use 2.7 or 2.8 liter diesels.

Of course, they're not expected to haul 2 tons at 80 mph up a 20 degree slope for hours on end, like most Americans think all trucks should... But they do a lot of mountain driving, too.

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by niky

It's a truck motor. It's common in Asia for working trucks with a 2 ton plus capacity tp use 2.7 or 2.8 liter diesels.

Of course, they're not expected to haul 2 tons at 80 mph up a 20 degree slope for hours on end, like most Americans think all trucks should... But they do a lot of mountain driving, too.

Excellent point, nicky. The applications are much differnt in Asia. I remember discussing with a gentleman from India, that 6-7 liter engine like American use in heavy duty pickups are used there for 80,000 lbs trucks (heavy semi trucks). If they hit a hill, they literally put a brick on the accelerator and go 25 mph all the way up the hill, but it gets them there.

BTW, if you get your hands on one of these trucks, please be sure to report back.

[ron]

Im having trouble getting past the 29,000 price tag. I know I should keep up with the times

[slowmover]

Originally Posted by niky

It's a truck motor. It's common in Asia for working trucks with a 2 ton plus capacity tp use 2.7 or 2.8 liter diesels.

Of course, they're not expected to haul 2 tons at 80 mph up a 20 degree slope for hours on end, like most Americans think all trucks should... But they do a lot of mountain driving, too.

I think I might clarify my post above. The Cummins/Dodge combo is a de-rated commercial engine. Light duty pickup truck work is a no sweat proposition. It is overpowered for nearly all non-commercial users.

But will the 1/2T truck small diesel be pushed too hard by owners? (thinking cooling system capacity and transmission). Higher fuel mileage, but at the price of gasoline engine service life. May be hard to make a case for it on purchase price premium.

Nothing I've come across tells me that the earlier Jeep Liberty with CRD lasted much past 150k without expensive repairs.

.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by niky

It's a truck motor. It's common in Asia for working trucks with a 2 ton plus capacity tp use 2.7 or 2.8 liter diesels.

Of course, they're not expected to haul 2 tons at 80 mph up a 20 degree slope for hours on end, like most Americans think all trucks should... But they do a lot of mountain driving, too.

Many of those small Diesel 4-bangers in the 2.8L to 3.0L displacement range can easily perform any duty performed by a small-block gasser V8. No wonder the bigger gassers are nearly extinct in South America, finding some popularity only in Chile, Venezuela and Bolivia.

[niky]

D_D, I plan to. I've got a drive with Ford's 2 liter diesel lined up, as well.

That new Ranger is fantastic. After a short drive in one, I can understand why Ford didn't send it there... Just too little differentiation from the F150. And it's likely that a diesel that America will want, like the 190hp 3.2, would push the price too close to the F150, as well. I'm betting the truck would jive well with the naturally aspirated 3.5, though.

Originally Posted by slowmover

I think I might clarify my post above. The Cummins/Dodge combo is a de-rated commercial engine. Light duty pickup truck work is a no sweat proposition. It is overpowered for nearly all non-commercial users.

But will the 1/2T truck small diesel be pushed too hard by owners? (thinking cooling system capacity and transmission). Higher fuel mileage, but at the price of gasoline engine service life. May be hard to make a case for it on purchase price premium.

Nothing I've come across tells me that the earlier Jeep Liberty with CRD lasted much past 150k without expensive repairs.

.

The problem is that not many high pressure systems last past 150k miles without costly repairs. Even the best CRDI fuel systems eventually succumb to bad fuel thanks to high rail pressures, piezo injectors and dirty diesel. Then you have the issues with variable geometry turbos and oil coking. Plus modern CRDI systems allow manufacturers to use engines that are not massively overbuilt, not like engines of old. At least VM Motori systems are relatively less sensitive to fuel contamination than Denso systems.

But most of these longitudinal mount engines like Mitsubishi's 2.5 are re-engineered old school diesels, so they should be RELATIVELY tough, unless they've been upgraded wi lightweight low friction internals. I don't know about the new Cummins. I know it's related to the older 300k mile engine, but I don't know how much is carried over.

Also, asian trucking is tough on equipment, so I don't know how equipment life cycles translate to US use. We consider urban use here as equivalent to three or four times US highway use in terms of engine wear.

Still, a lot of us are worried about the developments in diesel tech. The new motors are great when new, but I wouldn't touch a ten-year old CRDI with a ten foot pole. Not unless I had an extra two or three thousand dollars to repair any issues with the fuel system. Old diesels, on the other hand, would run forever.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by niky

That new Ranger is fantastic. After a short drive in one, I can understand why Ford didn't send it there... Just too little differentiation from the F150. And it's likely that a diesel that America will want, like the 190hp 3.2, would push the price too close to the F150, as well. I'm betting the truck would jive well with the naturally aspirated 3.5, though.

I wouldn't doubt the new Ranger to be the base for the next F150 in the U.S. nowadays that the E-series vans are scheduled to be replaced by the Transit.

The problem is that not many high pressure systems last past 150k miles without costly repairs. Even the best CRDI fuel systems eventually succumb to bad fuel thanks to high rail pressures, piezo injectors and dirty diesel. Then you have the issues with variable geometry turbos and oil coking.

I'd rather get a wastegate twin-scroll turbo over a VGT anytime, too bad they're not so popular in Diesels as they became in gassers.

Still, a lot of us are worried about the developments in diesel tech. The new motors are great when new, but I wouldn't touch a ten-year old CRDI with a ten foot pole. Not unless I had an extra two or three thousand dollars to repair any issues with the fuel system. Old diesels, on the other hand, would run forever.

Altough the noise reduction and fuel-efficiency increasements led by the common-rail setups are a good point, I'd still rather get an all-mechanical Diesel due to their resistence to harsher environmental conditions. There's no school like the old-school

But for a city commuter with occasional highway cruising I wouldn't be so unfavorable to a new-school Diesel. I'd like to try a Mazda Skyactiv-D someday