New 6.7 Cummins?

[Sickcall]

DC will introduce a larger and more fuel efficient engine, able to pass 2010 emmissions soon, according to a recent article quoting the CEO. He also stated the if only 1/3rd of the mid size trucks on the road today were diesel we would save 1.4 million barrels of oil a day, the same number of barrels imported dailey from Saudi Arabia. I don't know how accurate the figures are but why don't we have a mid size diesel truck! Why do we have to buy the HD models to get a diesel engine?

As the 4bt shared the same platform as the 6bt why hasn't it received the same enhancements and have been made available in the 1500 series Ram truck? I would think if someone offered a 1/2 ton diesel truck they would sell a lot of them.

[truck4myboys]

Agreed - I think there are some in the works. I'm surprised that they haven't debuted yet, but all of the big three supposedly are under design. It wouldn't surprise me if Toyota and Nissan show up with them first, since they have such strong small diesels in Japan. I'm also amazed that we don't have more diesel cars, Ford and Chevy both have them in Europe. The Ford Mondeo was all over Ireland with a diesel motor, and that model should be here within the next couple years.

[MoparNorm]

We don't have them yet because the tree huggers keep trying to kill them. The 2.8 diesel in th eLiberty was killed because it can't meet 2008 emissions regs and it can't run on the ULSD.
But fear not, the 3.0 BlueTec is 45 state legal and will be out in weeks. It will be CA legal in 2009. The 6.7 is already available and can be ordered in CA right now. And the best news of all, the Cummins 4.2 has passed testing and is ready for delivery in the 2009 Ram, Dakota and Jeep. If every new vehicle was diesel powered we would eliminate 33% of our fuel requirements.

MN

[sloth]

Toyota makes alot of nice small diesel engines. Its a shame they don't sell those models here. Toyota is bring a 1-ton diesel to market soon though, but the dates keep getting pushed out.

[Sickcall]

I don't think the EPA or CARB really look at the whole picture. How much pollution does a diesel put out over a gas engine vs the amout of fuel used? Wouldn't burning 20 to 40% less fuel result in considerable less pollutants than just rating tailpipe emissions from individual vehicles?

[MoparNorm]

You have to understand that the EPA and CARB are made up of bureaucratic tree huggers. They want diesel dead and in fact most industrialization turned back to the 1880's.
Diesels are in fact CLEANER than gasoline out of the box, the one issue they do have is visible soot. This soot is an easy target and has been found in some surveys, to cause lung cancer. Just like the bogus political hysteria over "global warming" the diesel is a pariah to many environmentalist who are ignorant of the facts.
MN

[MoparNorm]

I don't think the EPA or CARB really look at the whole picture. How much pollution does a diesel put out over a gas engine vs the amout of fuel used? Wouldn't burning 20 to 40% less fuel result in considerable less pollutants than just rating tailpipe emissions from individual vehicles?

The same argument can be made for gasoline motors. Most cars got 18-20 mpg before smog pumps and converters. When emission equipment first came out the mileage dropped to the 10's. It's always been simple math, a car getting 20 mpg burns less fuel per gallon than a car getting 15 mpg and is in fact cleaner per gallon of fuel burned, the regulations on emissions have been for the most part, political control of our economy by a certain party that will remain unnamed so as to not violate the terms of the posting agreement.....
MN

[warlock440]

burns less fuel per gallon
MN

How does that work?? Maybe what you meant to write was less fuel per mile

[MoparNorm]

How does that work?? Maybe what you meant to write was less fuel per mile

Ha!Ha! That would be a neat trick!
So much for multi-tasking! You are correct, it would burn less fuel per mile, thereby exhausting less pollutants per gallon than a so called clean motor.
MN