Thats crazy I didn't know that any asian companies used diesels in any of their trucks. Do they use the same cummins engine as Dodge does in the U.S?
Last edited:
2012 Diesel Ranger! (not in U.S.A)
- Thread starter Sn95Snake
- Start date
Thats crazy I didn't know that any asian companies used diesels in any of their trucks. Do they use the same cummins engine as Dodge does in the U.S?
The Afghan National Security Forces have had these for a couple of years now. I was in Marjah, Afghanistan in 2010 and they were everywhere. They're the older body style but still diesel, 4x4, crew cab and have a mini-lift with larger tires. They look awesome and (when properly maintained) perform very well in these harsh conditions. I'm in Afghanistan again right now and just today said that I'd definitely get one if they were available in the US.
i thought i heard a while back that ford was getting rid of the ranger and replacing it with the f-100.
Production has ended for the US Ranger, but there hasn't been any talk about replacing it for a while.
Why are you posting a articale from 1.5 year's ago ??
Because I just found out about it and I found it interesting.
That one is quite simple. Because with current diesel emissions requirements in the US, the Ecoboost V6 currently offered has lower fuel costs and costs $10k less than a 4.5l diesel in the same pickup.
In engines below 300HP/400ft lbs there is no longer any advantage to diesel in the US with current gas engine technology. Its going to go further in that direction as we go further with gas tech surpassing that of diesel and the cost of diesel fuel and engines continuinuing to rise. For larger engines/vehicles it will be a long time before that happens as the money is not being spent on development in that size range.
For Gas engines yes, for diesel, the US requirements for NoX and CO2 emissions are where europe are headed by 2020. This is one case where CA got the Feds ahead of the rest of the world. I don't agree with it but thems the requirements. When Europe catches up, its likely that sales of small diesels will decline there too.
Diesels below 300HP in the US no longer make any ecomomic sense. GM is only looking at buying small diesels for the 1500/Tahoe because they have nothing like the Ecoboost nor can they buy it.
Ecoboost is really nothing really novel. They had a DI/turbo motor motor sold in the states before Ford did.
A small diesel could definitely make sense if executed properly, keeping costs in check.
Nope.
North American vehicles use the ISB 6.7, most of the export markets use a scaled down ISF 4.5L engine which is a 4 cylinder as opposed to the I6 we all know and love.
I know there was talk of the US seeing a 1/2 ton Titan with the ISF, but nothing seems to have materialized. Just like the perpetual rumors that someone is going to use the light duty diesel line from Cummins which includes a *gasp* V-engine! Despite the rumors flying and a fair amount of demand, there's no 1/2 ton diesel in the near future for the US anytime soon.
Cost is the last thing a diesel is going to do for you. With the upcoming stringent EPA2013/2014 standards, aftertreatment is going to be even more important. Sure the small diesel is great on fuel, but now you have to pay for a DEF tank, a DPF (which needs a doser and regular regens) a doser module for the DEF, and an SCR. Not so easy huh? None of that stuff is cheap either. That's part of the reason you're seeing some markets like refuse go to natural gas.
Sorry, shows how little you know about what Ecoboost is. Its more about flame propogation management. The Gen II Ecoboost goes much further in that direction with direct monitoring of cylinder pressures. The timing of the injection along with compter controlled EGR control flame front rate of burn. This is why Ecoboost engines run fine on regular unleaded gas. As the control gets better in next gen Ecoboost engines the compression can be raised and the injection timing moved to just before ignition. Once the dynamic compression of the Ecoboost engine is the same as a comparable speed diesel, there is no longer an inherent advantage to the diesel in brake specific fuel consumption.
Its not about direct injection and turbos, its about flame management. Read the patents and SAE papers, its really quite interesting.
Never said it wasn't a good engine, just they are far from the first to do it. Their move to put it in a truck application was quite brilliant, but pretty much every other OEM has something very similar.
Users who are viewing this thread
