Diesel Place banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was with a group at Caterpillar HQ last week, heard a presentation on their ACERT engines. Basically, they opted to redesign their entire engine lineup to meet EPA Tier 3 (?) emissions as opposed to using EGR technology.

Bottom line, they claimed to increase performance while competitors just complicated their engines with EGR and a bunch of coolers on their pre-emission engines. Engineer told us that the cooled EGR resulted in more soot in intake and shorter oil change intervals as well struggling to maintain performance.

Only negative was higher cost than competitors, but with diesels in truck and industrial equipment the longevity was a perceived benefit.

I asked the marketing guy for trucks if they would be doing a pickup engine. He politely said no and sounded like it would stay that way. Too many potential problems and the cost of a Cat would probably be too expensive in a competitive market.

I just kept thinking about how they took the easy way out in making the transition to the LLY and how we all end up chasing the performance backwards by removing what they had to do (EGR, Cat Converter, etc.)

We probably should not expect much better when many of us trade every 2-3 years anyway.

BTW- Changed the oil after 5K miles with EGR on, filthiest I have seen from any of our diesel engines!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Bottom line, they claimed to increase performance while competitors just complicated their engines with EGR and a bunch of coolers on their pre-emission engines. Engineer told us that the cooled EGR resulted in more soot in intake and shorter oil change intervals as well struggling to maintain performance.
!
Actually, if you look at the competing engines for this class, egr is a much simpler way to go. ACERT uses -2- turbos, along with electro-hydraulic actuators in the valve train to open exhaust valves on the intake stroke, to suck exhaust gases back in to the combustion chamber to lower EGTs, and therefore nitrous oxides.

Cat elected to go with the ACERT, mainly due to the need to keep off road engines operating within the EPA guidlines, with thier power on / power off fueling.

In any event, this EPA crap is expensive, eats fuel, and really is screwing things up, for everyone. At one point, the EPA was trying to mandate the use of Urea, a nitrogen rich fertilizer made from anhydrous ammonia (via natural gas) as a filter to trap the nitrous oxide that was developed from high combustion temps. Very expensive fix, and distribution nightmare........... So the EPA dropped this idea... for now...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,412 Posts
I just kept thinking about how they took the easy way out in making the transition to the LLY and how we all end up chasing the performance backwards by removing what they had to do (EGR, Cat Converter, etc.)
There is world of difference in the EPA emissions requirements for light duty trucks (our 2500HD & 3500) compared to heavy duty over the road trucks. EGR and catalytic converter are there because the EPA requires the lower emission standards. Without them, we would not have the Duramax engine now. Believe me, the engineers would love nothing better than to be able build the trucks WITHOUT this crap. The problem is that no EGR/CAT = NO DURAMAX ENGINE for our trucks. Sad but true!

If the pickup truck makers are forced to wait for solutions without EGR/CAT, the cost would be astronomical right now and could force them to eliminate the diesel engine from the line up. EPA would be ecstatic if they could eliminate diesels. They hate diesel.

Have you priced a Caterpillar engine lately? I can tell you that if you were a pickup truck manufacturer and were able to shoehorn a CAT engine from a big Kenworth into a pickup, the EPA would still force you to meet the pickup truck emission requirements and the cost would increase tremendously. They would very likely have to add EGR and a catalytic converter along with a particulate trap to meet the current standards.

Sadly, there is always a trade-off somewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
EPA would be ecstatic if they could eliminate diesels. They hate diesel.

Have you priced a Caterpillar engine lately? I can tell you that if you were a pickup truck manufacturer and were able to shoehorn a CAT engine from a big Kenworth into a pickup, the EPA would still force you to meet the pickup truck emission requirements and the cost would increase tremendously. They would very likely have to add EGR and a catalytic converter along with a particulate trap to meet the current standards.

Sadly, there is always a trade-off somewhere.

Yep, the EPA is waaaaaaay out there. They hug trees from birth, I am thinking. There really is a limit as to real life, vs utopia, with the EPA wanting us to walk everywhere. Can't even have horses, since there is a methane problem. Ever stuck a CAT on a horse? That's how dumb it is.

Last big rig we bought we went with a Cummins ISX. Other wise its been Cat, except for our smaller stuff where we have a mix of MBE 900s, and Cummins ISB.

Wait another year and see what happens to the big stuff pricing. I've already got estimates for the engines that are going to get wacked in 2007. Looks like an additional $8k per motor, and they are going to run significant less mileage........... Great, now we'll go from 5.5 to 4.5...... Lovely........ So we burn more fuel, but it's cleaner...... I wonder if the net result of all this EPA crap is exactly -0-..... Sure it's cleaner (supposidly) however, now we have to burn more......

Without a doubt, diesel is going to be the saving grace in the USA..... Most folks just don't know it yet. Looks like you're over in MI, I'm over here in ND. With the amount of farming that we have, and the yields, we could be the Saudi Arabia of bio-diesel....... Already have a few plants going up here.......... Canola, Soybean, Corn, whatever.... We can grow it.

It would much better deal to keep our $$$s here in the USA, instead of sending them over to people who like to shoot at us.

Chevymax.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
crapper

The EPA mandates those new use less water crappers. H ow do thet save water when they have to be flushed 4 times to complete the job? Is there no way to rein in those idiots?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,460 Posts
when i was in school it was sponsored by quinn cat and one of my instructors told me that in 2007-8 in the fresno area (poor air quality) that cat engines in that area that the exhaust coming out of the engine will be cleaner than the air it took in the intake what do you guys think about that and this is not just some BS i made up the only thing that might be wrong is the year by one or two but i dont think so
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
663 Posts
In any event, this EPA crap is expensive, eats fuel, and really is screwing things up, for everyone.
Actually, the new John Deere 9.0L PowerTech (?) engine meets the latest EPA off highway regs (Tier 3?) and uses less fuel per horsepower hour than the 8.1L engine it replaces. There was an article on it in the latest issue of Diesel Progress magazine. They use VGT and EGR technology similar to our beloved Duramax, only bigger. Those who say it can't be done need to get out of the way of the people doing it. :rant:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
Sure Does!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Jd

Actually, the new John Deere 9.0L PowerTech (?) engine meets the latest EPA off highway regs (Tier 3?) and uses less fuel per horsepower hour than the 8.1L engine it replaces. There was an article on it in the latest issue of Diesel Progress magazine. They use VGT and EGR technology similar to our beloved Duramax, only bigger. Those who say it can't be done need to get out of the way of the people doing it. :rant:
John Deere's run great, that's why you see so much green up in my neck of the woods. (North Dakota)

Seeing your post, I wonder is you could answer one question. Would a JD 9.0 PowerTech without EPA mandated equipment, use even less fuel per hourspower hour?

I think that the increase in economy that you are talking about is more a function of superior engineering, not a function of adding additional pollution control......


Chevymax.
John Deere Owner
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
663 Posts
Good question Chevymax. Unfortunately I'm not smart enough to answer it. The magazine is one of about 8 freebies I get at work and I've passed it on to another gearhead. I took time to read that article only because it had John Deere in the title. I agree with the superior engineering comment. I'm not sure how much fuel economy the EGR system is robbing on the 9.0L. The article was mainly on the engineering that went into meeting Tier 3 and how Deere laid down the gauntlet for everyone else in terms of fuel economy with emissions compliance. It would be interesting to know how it behaves without the emissions gear installed...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
329 Posts
Without a doubt, diesel is going to be the saving grace in the USA..... Most folks just don't know it yet. Looks like you're over in MI, I'm over here in ND. With the amount of farming that we have, and the yields, we could be the Saudi Arabia of bio-diesel....... Already have a few plants going up here.......... Canola, Soybean, Corn, whatever.... We can grow it.

It would much better deal to keep our $$$s here in the USA, instead of sending them over to people who like to shoot at us.

Chevymax.
This same thing has been on my mind for years now... I can't wait until it happens. We can get lots of farmers back into business building our very own energy stockpile, without the need for foreign oil... I don't mean to sound like a tree huggin' liberal, or an isolationist... but the foreign oil crap has affected us all!

:ro)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,460 Posts
John Deere's run great, that's why you see so much green up in my neck of the woods. (North Dakota)

Seeing your post, I wonder is you could answer one question. Would a JD 9.0 PowerTech without EPA mandated equipment, use even less fuel per hourspower hour?

I think that the increase in economy that you are talking about is more a function of superior engineering, not a function of adding additional pollution control......


Chevymax.
John Deere Owner
i think you might get a little better fuel per horsepower per hour by removing it or just disabling it with a blocker plate but then you might start to throw codes so a fingerstick type deal might be needed to keep that from happening
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Yep, the EPA is waaaaaaay out there. They hug trees from birth, I am thinking. There really is a limit as to real life, vs utopia, with the EPA wanting us to walk everywhere. Can't even have horses, since there is a methane problem. Ever stuck a CAT on a horse? That's how dumb it is.

Last big rig we bought we went with a Cummins ISX. Other wise its been Cat, except for our smaller stuff where we have a mix of MBE 900s, and Cummins ISB.

Wait another year and see what happens to the big stuff pricing. I've already got estimates for the engines that are going to get wacked in 2007. Looks like an additional $8k per motor, and they are going to run significant less mileage........... Great, now we'll go from 5.5 to 4.5...... Lovely........ So we burn more fuel, but it's cleaner...... I wonder if the net result of all this EPA crap is exactly -0-..... Sure it's cleaner (supposidly) however, now we have to burn more......

Without a doubt, diesel is going to be the saving grace in the USA..... Most folks just don't know it yet. Looks like you're over in MI, I'm over here in ND. With the amount of farming that we have, and the yields, we could be the Saudi Arabia of bio-diesel....... Already have a few plants going up here.......... Canola, Soybean, Corn, whatever.... We can grow it.

It would much better deal to keep our $$$s here in the USA, instead of sending them over to people who like to shoot at us.

Chevymax.
:exactly: Amen!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,129 Posts
You want to know how FU the EPA is here in NY? REALLY FU!!! The new stormwater regs will have you talking and answering yourself.If you have a valley for instance, on your land,un-disturbed for years that has been getting silt built up;now you start building on your land,not even disturbing the hills leading to this valley--you have to silt fence the entire perimeter;this only after your "special" engineer you were forced to hire has documented everything.He is required to visit the site for every 1/2'' of rain or more and report his findings in a lockable safe box on site that the EPA guy has a key for.1 thing wrong and it's a $5K fine---NO plea--NOTHING--you are screwed!:eek:fftopic: :rant: :rant:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,798 Posts
It's Oxides of Nitrogen not nitrous oxide, these usually occur at around 800 or so degrees F combustion temp. Higher the temp the more oxides produced, egr is cheap and easy way to control the comb temps. A lot of engines use more cam overlap to control temps.... it's actually an egr system, one you can't easily defeat

Oxides of nitrogen is Oxygen and Nitrogen fusing together.... so in actuality we have fusion engines
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 · (Edited)
Green 9 liters

9 Liter Deere's- Aren't those the engines that all the JD Dealers are overhauling this winter on a recall? Sorry, we've got red in our shed.

Moral of the Cat story for pickups- We wouldn't need or demand the technology of ACERT as the pickup market is way to competitive on cost and most (not all) wouldn't need the longevity advantage that would be gained. I can't imagine paying another $8K for a CAT in a pickup over a D-Max.

EGR is now on Case (Cummins) and JD 2006 model year diesel tractors and combines. I guess that a couple thousand acres of growing crops don't produce enough oxygen to make up for the one combine and several tractors used to produce it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
i think you might get a little better fuel per horsepower per hour by removing it or just disabling it with a blocker plate but then you might start to throw codes so a fingerstick type deal might be needed to keep that from happening

I think you are right. What's amazing though is how well some of these engines are designed, with the mill stone of 'pollution control' around thier necks.

I have friends with late 60's muscle cars, heavyweight little beasts. They get 20 mpg or better with all that weight, 3 speed autos, 350hp+ etc. What could a modern motor get for MPG/Power with 5 speed overdrives, and no pollution control.........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
You want to know how FU the EPA is here in NY? REALLY FU!!! The new stormwater regs will have you talking and answering yourself.If you have a valley for instance, on your land,un-disturbed for years that has been getting silt built up;now you start building on your land,not even disturbing the hills leading to this valley--you have to silt fence the entire perimeter;this only after your "special" engineer you were forced to hire has documented everything.He is required to visit the site for every 1/2'' of rain or more and report his findings in a lockable safe box on site that the EPA guy has a key for.1 thing wrong and it's a $5K fine---NO plea--NOTHING--you are screwed!:eek:fftopic: :rant: :rant:

Several years ago, I worked for a well known national land development / houseing company in Minneapolis, MN. Here is a selection MN tree hugging at it's finest

- All trees on a piece of land where plotted on blueprints by city foresters, and measured in inches. If you removed a tree, you were fined, and required to replant with a similar sized tree.

- Storm water holding ponds. based on the square footage of roof / driveway/ street/ sidewalk, etc, you had to account for the increase in storm water runoff, with the limiting factor of 'no more than natural flow' prior to building. Therefore, we had to flow water to a manmade pond, that released the water at the prior release rate into the water recepticle. (river etc)

- Storm water holding pond next to a protected trout stream. Not only did we have to build a stormwater holding pond, but we had to install refrigerated chillers, to chill the storm water as it passed into the river, to lower the temp so that the trout wouldn't get too warm........

- Wet Cycle. Land with standing water had a wet time limit. Too long with standing water, and the land was reclassified as 'wet lands' and had to be mitigated prior to building. In other words, to use the land, you had to contruct a real wet land twice as big as the 'wet land' you were building on.



Just a few examples of tree huggin at it's finest.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
9 Liter Deere's- Aren't those the engines that all the JD Dealers are overhauling this winter on a recall? Sorry, we've got red in our shed.

Moral of the Cat story for pickups- We wouldn't need or demand the technology of ACERT as the pickup market is way to competitive on cost and most (not all) wouldn't need the longevity advantage that would be gained. I can't imagine paying another $8K for a CAT in a pickup over a D-Max.

EGR is now on Case (Cummins) and JD 2006 model year diesel tractors and combines. I guess that a couple thousand acres of growing crops don't produce enough oxygen to make up for the one combine and several tractors used to produce it!

Is that 'cause red won't start?

ha ha ha........


Nope, a couple thousand acres doesn't measure up..... You need to actually hug trees and sing Cum-bi-ya.

If the crop deal was a reality, we could run smoke like a steam engine up here in ND.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,683 Posts
......

Hey,

And those 9.0Powertechs are still fuel pigs. No as bad as the one it replaced but not much better!!! And thats why we buy MF!!
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top