Lexus Remains Lukewarm on Diesel

[Och]

Are there any diesel cars from other manufacturers that met EPA requirements without SCR? If so, I bet they are going to be in trouble as well.

 

[IS-SV]

Are there any diesel cars from other manufacturers that met EPA requirements without SCR? If so, I bet they are going to be in trouble as well.

I don't know of any off top of head.

But Mazda 2.2L turbo diesel does not have SCR (urea tratment) and the Mazda guys said they can't seem to get it to run clean while delivering acceptable power and efficiency, so it's delayed indefinitely.

What's you view on these TDIs passing Euro6 regs?

 

[Och]

I don't know of any off top of head.

But Mazda 2.2L turbo diesel does not have SCR (urea tratment) and the Mazda guys said they can't seem to get it to run clean while delivering acceptable power and efficiency, so it's delayed indefinitely.

What's you view on these TDIs passing Euro6 regs?

From what I understand Euro6 is a new standard that was just implemented, and 2016 VW models were getting SCR systems anyway to comply with it. The current models were only compliant with Euro 5. But don't quote me on it, I'm only basing this conclusion on bits and pieces of information I found on the net - it may be totally off.

Might be a good time to buy some used TDI's on the cheap, as they will surely plummet in value, ship them to eastern Europe and Russia and sell for nice profit.

 

[mmcartalk]

Might be a good time to buy some used TDI's on the cheap, as they will surely plummet in value, ship them to eastern Europe and Russia and sell for nice profit.

Do they have the low-sulfur diesel fuel in Russia? That is a requirement for virtually all modern diesels. Of course, if Russia does not have emissions-laws (and I'm not sure of the exact laws there) then maybe one can run on the old fuels, modern diesel or not.

 

[Och]

Do they have the low-sulfur diesel fuel in Russia? That is a requirement for virtually all modern diesels. Of course, if Russia does not have emissions-laws (and I'm not sure of the exact laws there) then maybe one can run on the old fuels, modern diesel or not.

Good question, I will find out. I know that they have arctic diesel mixes that are suitable for cold regions - regular diesels freezes up in extreme cold.

From my observation diesel passenger cars are not very popular in Russia, but CNG conversions are very popular. Most gas stations have CNG.

 

[mmcartalk]

Good question, I will find out. I know that they have arctic diesel mixes that are suitable for cold regions - regular diesels freezes up in extreme cold.

Years ago, passenger-car diesels used to come with two batteries to help with the cold-cranking amps at low temperatures....but I either haven't noticed it that much with new diesels, or they simply are no longer necessary because of better engineering.

From my observation diesel passenger cars are not very popular in Russia, but CNG conversions are very popular. Most gas stations have CNG.

That would make sense. Russia itself sits on some huge natural-gas resources.

 

[Och]

Years ago, passenger-car diesels used to come with two batteries to help with the cold-cranking amps at low temperatures....but I either haven't noticed it that much with new diesels, or they simply are no longer necessary because of better engineering.

My Ford had two batteries as well. These diesel engines have higher compression, and so they take a lot more effort to crank, so doubling up on the batteries provide the extra needed amps. It even had the option of installing a second alternator to run more accessories. And even with two batteries it struggled somewhat to start during very cold days - and NYC isn't even that cold. I know that in really cold regions they use compressed air to crank up frozen diesels.

Double batteries are not needed on passenger car diesels, because they run smaller displacement engines with less cylinders - but that single battery will deplete real fast if the engine is struggling to crank in cold weather.

That would make sense. Russia itself sits on some huge natural-gas resources.

From what I understand, CNG is very clean burning with very clean emissions. It is also very easy to convert petrol engine to CNG. I'm surprised it is not a popular option in the US, as it could be a nice alternative.

 

[IS-SV]

From what I understand, CNG is very clean burning with very clean emissions. It is also very easy to convert petrol engine to CNG. I'm surprised it is not a popular option in the US, as it could be a nice alternative.

That's right CNG is clean burning (much cleaner than even legit clean diesels). US also has huge/excess NG reserves. Most of the US growth with CNG is in light/local trucking applications (examples being UPS, garbage trucks, AT&T, etc.)

 

[IS-SV]

Are there any diesel cars from other manufacturers that met EPA requirements without SCR? If so, I bet they are going to be in trouble as well.

The other small-engine diesel sold in the US is the Chevy Cruze diesel (not that I expect good volume from this car, especially after the damage VW did to pretty much kill that market in US). This car has particulate filter plus urea injection to trim oxides of nitrogen. The 4.5-gallon urea tank is located under the trunk floor where the spare tire used to be.

With or without a lukewarm attitude at Lexus towards diesels, increased demand for Toyota/Lexus hybrids is now possible thanks to VW's fraud/cheating.

 

[spwolf]

From what I understand Euro6 is a new standard that was just implemented, and 2016 VW models were getting SCR systems anyway to comply with it. The current models were only compliant with Euro 5. But don't quote me on it, I'm only basing this conclusion on bits and pieces of information I found on the net - it may be totally off.

Might be a good time to buy some used TDI's on the cheap, as they will surely plummet in value, ship them to eastern Europe and Russia and sell for nice profit.

Well here is how it goes - for NOx emissions, EuroVI specifies minimum of 80g/km while EPA says 12.5g/km... so thats over 6x smaller on EPA test than EuroVI and thats why they still dont need SCR on small diesels in Europe. Heck until last year, they didnt even need DPF on small diesels.

Ever since 2009, EU has been trailing US when it comes to emission standards while before we had much stricter laws than the US.... problem is lobbying from European automakers due to really poor profitability situation in Europe ever since 2009. Since small diesels are most important in Europe, they want to pay off the investment.

Another thing is that now small turbo direct injection engines have way more particles than diesels, that are much finer and actually linked to cancer, however under EU legislations, they are not even checked. EU planned to incorporate this by 2015, and then by 2018 but due to lobbying it seems to be by 2020. Automakers want to skip costs of DPF for turbo engines with direct injection.

 

[Och]

Well here is how it goes - for NOx emissions, EuroVI specifies minimum of 80g/km while EPA says 12.5g/km... so thats over 6x smaller on EPA test than EuroVI and thats why they still dont need SCR on small diesels in Europe. Heck until last year, they didnt even need DPF on small diesels.

Ever since 2009, EU has been trailing US when it comes to emission standards while before we had much stricter laws than the US.... problem is lobbying from European automakers due to really poor profitability situation in Europe ever since 2009. Since small diesels are most important in Europe, they want to pay off the investment.

Another thing is that now small turbo direct injection engines have way more particles than diesels, that are much finer and actually linked to cancer, however under EU legislations, they are not even checked. EU planned to incorporate this by 2015, and then by 2018 but due to lobbying it seems to be by 2020. Automakers want to skip costs of DPF for turbo engines with direct injection.

There was a heated discussion back in 2006 on an automotive forum regarding diesels, and one of the members made a very interesting post. I'll just quote it here, for whatever it's still worth in 2015. Hopefully it doesn't violate any rules here.

It's humorous reading the debates that go on concerning Diesel engines on this and other boards. There is always one camp that dispises Diesels, and one camp that practically worships them, holding them as the Holy Grail of automotive technology that sophisticated Europeans have discovered, and, if only ignorant Americans would get on board, the world would be a better place.

I'm an American living in Europe. Bamberg, Germany, to be exact. I've driven a BMW 5-series Diesel. I rented it last year when I first moved here. It was brand new, with only a few miles on the odometer. I also drive among dozens, if not hundreds, of European Diesel engine cars every day, some new, some old.

Guess what?
1. The new ones still rattle.
2. The new ones still smoke.
3. The new ones still stink.

All these annoyances have been greatly reduced compared with Diesels of yesteryear. For example, I couldn't hear the BMW's engine when I drove it with the windows up. I could only hear it with the windows rolled down. I don't mind the Diesel rattle, but others do, and that BMW Diesel did NOT have the melifluous sound of a gasoline BMW I-6, not by a LONG shot. Other than that, it was smooth, comfortable, and sporty enough to be enjoyable to drive.

Driving behind many a brand new Audi, BMW, VW and Mercedes Diesel I've noticed that, when they start from a stop sign or stop light, and when they downshift on a slow corner, or going uphill, they belch out a puff of black smoke. Again, a huge improvement over the Diesels of the past, but still not as clean as a modern gasoline engine. This should come as no surprise.

Another issue I noticed driving behind European Diesels. They still stink. Even inside my car (now a Euro-spec, 1999 gasoline Ford Mondeo) with the windows rolled up, I can still detect the unmistakeable scent of Diesel fumes eminating from the tail pipes of even the newest European wunderDiesels.

Also, keep in mind that European governments keep Diesel prices artificially lower than gasoline prices by taxing gasoline at much higher percentages than Diesel, which makes Diesel cars more popular here. US Federal and State governments don't do that, so Diesel prices in the US are typically higher than gasoline prices due to supply and demand issues.

Will Mercedes' Bluetec eliminate the smoke and the smell? I don't know, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Will Diesels sell in the US? I think they will. I'd buy one. I'd love it if my Toyota 4Runnerback home had a modern TurboDiesel.

And that's where manufacturers should start reintroducing Diesels, in bigger vehicles like SUVs. I think the people who drive SUVs, pickups and even minivanswould be more receptive to a Dieselengine than, say, someone shopping for a compact sedan, or a luxury sedan.

 

[Och]

Also, it may be worth noting that Medcedes' Bluetec engines initially did not have urea treatment, and debuted as 45 state legal. They couldn't pass emissions in California, Maine, Massacheussetes, New York, or Vermont until they adopted the SCR systems.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/08/e320_bluetec_ar.html

 

[spwolf]

Also, it may be worth noting that Medcedes' Bluetec engines initially did not have urea treatment, and debuted as 45 state legal. They couldn't pass emissions in California, Maine, Massacheussetes, New York, or Vermont until they adopted the SCR systems.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/08/e320_bluetec_ar.html

SCR is fine now.. they can pass anything with SCR, although it has to be said that under load, according to recent Euro research, some SCR systems still emit 9x more than EuroVI.

 

[Och]

SCR is fine now.. they can pass anything with SCR, although it has to be said that under load, according to recent Euro research, some SCR systems still emit 9x more than EuroVI.

That could be because EGR systems generally shut down under heavy throttle, to allow for maximum engine output. This is probably not a big deal since nobody drives with the gas pedal floored for a prolonged period of time.

 

[spwolf]

That could be because EGR systems generally shut down under heavy throttle, to allow for maximum engine output. This is probably not a big deal since nobody drives with the gas pedal floored for a prolonged period of time.

its NOx like here, due to higher loads... things like going uphil and city driving with a lot of speeding up... It is not proportional with fuel usage though, unlike CO2. So when fuel usage goes up by 2x, NOx goes 8x-9x. However this is not outside the spec, since Euro testing (or EPA) does not include a lot of usage with higher engine loads.