Ford says SUV fuel economy goal getting tougher
Steve Barker
diesel running there. Mine says 0 after several hours of running. I can
run a lawnmower in the shop and set it off in about 3 minutes. Real life
experiences. Plus the knowledge that diesel puts of a miniscule amount of
CO.
--
===============
Steve Barker
Stilwell, Kansas
UP (Mopac) Coffeyville Sub MP 308
Nikon CP 995 PSP 7.04
Remove the "nospam" from my address to abuse my email box.
Yes, I top post. Deal with it or ignore it.
"Tom Zweifel" <tomzw...@removeme.att.net> wrote in message
news:%_X49.5078$Ke2.4...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Alright, I'm raising the BS flag on that one. I'll be the first to admit
> that I'm wrong if proven so, but there is no way in hell you won't die of
> something if you tried that, and I'd be inclined put carbon monoxide
> poisoning at the top of my post mortem list.
>
> Why would you say that diesel exhaust won't hurt you and why would you
claim
> that diesel exhaust wouldn't contain a significant if not lethal quantity
of
> carbon monoxide?
>
> Again, I'm not being confrontational or insulting here, just please
provide
> something to back that one up.
>
Steve Barker
--
===============
Steve
"Dean Dardwin" <d...@dxd.com> dribbled in message news:3D545F...@dxd.com...Tom,
He can't back it up because it isn't true. Catalytic converters remove nearly all the CO. You'll die of old age before you die of CO poisoning.
Dean
Steve Barker
--
===============
Steve Barker
Stilwell, Kansas
UP (Mopac) Coffeyville Sub MP 308
Nikon CP 995 PSP 7.04
Remove the "nospam" from my address to abuse my email box.
Yes, I top post. Deal with it or ignore it.
"sw" <urri...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> misspelled in message
news:2hi8lukocoi61h99n...@4ax.com...
> the cummings is a far better unit
> truth is you have NEVER WORKED on either
> and you just babbling
>
>
> hurricane ast
>
>
>
>
>
Steve Barker
don't harm the atmosphere. Don't know about the carcinogens. What doesn't
contain those?
--
===============
Steve Barker
Stilwell, Kansas
UP (Mopac) Coffeyville Sub MP 308
Nikon CP 995 PSP 7.04
Remove the "nospam" from my address to abuse my email box.
Yes, I top post. Deal with it or ignore it.
"Checkmate" <Lunati...@The.Edge> wrote in message
news:aj1ofd$78e$5...@pita.alt.net...
>
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2002 23:02:43 GMT, Steve Barker put forth the notion
that...
>
> > BUT the fact of the matter is that the diesels are more efficient, and
you
> > can breathe that stink all day and it won't hurt you.
>
> Diesel exhaust is loaded with particulates and carcinogens.
>
Rick Blaine
skyrocket. You like to breath diesel exhaust fine, I don't and I hope those
stinky things never chatch on. A few on the road is fine but if it was
every other car... barf!
"Steve Barker" <railph...@hotmail.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:nSX49.10226$mj7.2...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> BUT the fact of the matter is that the diesels are more efficient, and you
SUV
> (mall terrain vehicle) in the garage and see what happens. With a diesel,
> you'll never die of carbon monoxide poisoning.
>
> --
> ===============
> Steve
>
> Remove the "nospam" from my address to abuse my email box.
>
> Yes, I top post. Deal with it or ignore it.
>
>
> news:8OX49.122787$f05.6...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
> > Never happen. Unless gas prices rise to european levels. Who likes
> driving
> > behind stinky oil burners?
> > "A. Mueller-Witt" <muew...@yahoo.de> wrote in message
> > news:aj13g4$o0k$00$1...@news.t-online.com...
> > > hohoho,
> > > this time I agree with you. About 80% of all SUVs and Vans sold in
> Europe
> > > are diesel-powered. Not without reason. America will follow.
> > > Andreas
> > >
> > > > a diesel is more environmentally friendly
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
hnelson
They are made. They are called Land Rover Defender 110's with turbo diesels
they just don't sell them in the land of the free.
Howard
> Well at least they're trying. I'm sure they will significantly reduce
SUV's
> fuel consumption over the years. Though I'm positive even if somehow a
Ford
> Excursion got 30 MPG MPG the SUV hating "loons", if you will, would still
> whine about SUVs burning so much gas and polluting so much. Oh well,
> progress is good, every little bit helps, seeing as how many SUVs are sold
> each year.
>
> The thing I don't get is why they have to be so heavy. My 67 Galaxie is
> under 3600 lbs and is longer than many SUVs. Of the SUVs I've been in it
> seems like there's all this extra luxury crap in them that just adds
weight
> and bulk. I mean really, who buys a SUV with leather seats? You can't use
> the thing if it's got leather! I wouldn't want to get into my truck's
> leather seats while covered in dirt and mud from work or play. What about
> all these automatic things like automatic folding seats? I'm sure that
adds
> more weight over a normal seat that you can just take out. Anyway, why not
> remove some of the useless junk in the SUV and basically cut the fat. It
> could stand to help. With a lighter car your average Joe Schmoe won't
> necessarily buy as big an engine since a smaller engine may feel
sufficient
> for what he wants. Take a couple hundred pounds out of the car and you can
> feel the difference.
clevere
shop, I really liked it when Dodge trucks came in... the exhaust had a sweet
smell to it. All the fords (in my opinion) smelled like diesel fuel and
oil.
"Rick Blaine" <fern...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:_1059.123912$f05.6...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
clevere
times.
"Diesel Power" <bfoust*@*ntws.net> wrote in message
news:q%Q49.5690$QV2....@news.webusenet.com...
> Exactly, not to mention having a vehicle that'll outlive anything else on
> the road with proper care.
>
> Bryan
>
>
> --
> 1975 Mercedes 240D
> 1999 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins Turbodiesel
> 2003 Saturn VUE
> Yanmar diesel tractor
>
> "clevere" <clev...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ZhJ49.47248$sA3....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
> > I'd take any of them with a cummins turbo diesel. That's 20-25 mpg
easy,
> > loaded or not.
> >
> > "Diesel Power" <bfoust*@*ntws.net> wrote in message
> > news:tcJ49.5606$QV2....@news.webusenet.com...
> > > I have to ask this question - Why not?
> > >
> > > Bryan
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 1975 Mercedes 240D
> > > 1999 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins Turbodiesel
> > > 2003 Saturn VUE
> > > Yanmar diesel tractor
> > >
> > > "Bob" <rwknu...@charter.com> wrote in message
> > > news:ul6c0fs...@corp.supernews.com...
> > > >
> > > > "MrDancer" <mrda...@cox.your.underwear.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:HmF49.7272$SE1...@news1.central.cox.net...
> > > > > "Grover C. McCoury III" wrote in message...
> > > > > > TRAVERSE CITY, Mich., Aug 8 (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co.'s goal of
> > > > > > increasing the fuel efficiency of its sport utility vehicles by
25
> > > > > > percent in five years has become tougher because some new
> > fuel-saving
> > > > > > techniques have failed to live up to expectations, Ford's
> > > environmental
> > > > > > chief said on Thursday.
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder if they ever considered making the vehicles lighter in
> > weight?
> > > > God
> > > > > forbid they drop the heighth on them to get back some of the
> handling
> > > and
> > > > > MPG!
> > > > >
> > > > > A classic example is Jeep... they replaced their Cherokee with a
> > vehicle
> > > > > that is taller, much heavier, and (duh!) gets worse MPG - it's the
> > price
> > > > we
> > > > > pay for what passes as progress. :(
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm still waiting for little diesels to power the Dakotas,
Durangos,
> > > > Tahoes,
> > > > > Explorers, etc......
> > > >
> > > > I wouldn't think they could "give" these vehicles away if they were
> > > powered
> > > > by your "little diesels" I certainly wouldn't want one.
> > > >
> > > > > me (who's tired of waiting behind SUVs attempting to negotiate
> > corners)
> > > > > --
> > > > > Remove .your.underwear to reply
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Tom Zweifel
there would be next to no oxygen left in the room and the soot would choke a
horse.
I hope you don't mind but I don't think I'm going to try that one.
Tom.
"Steve Barker" <railph...@hotmail.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:kC%49.10495$27.2...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
Dean Dardwin
You hit the nail on the head. Even the lame-ass EPA now recognizes the extreme health danger of diesel soot (particulates) and has mandated a reduction.
Dean
Jinxter
I've NEVER seen anything about WTF it really is. I know you've been asked
before about what it is, but you never answered the question (nothing new
there, huh!?).
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
news:lro8lu0302kq1kpnc...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Aug 2002 01:34:24 GMT, "Frank" <fran...@nospamattbi.com>
> wrote:
>
> >You are so full of shit I can smell you way down here in the states.
>
> nope you aint no technician
> WANNA BEE
> a CERTFIED RED SEAL TECHNICIAN
> state your credentials
>
> then retake high school chemistry
>
>
> fuel for diesel is divides into 3 categories
> slow speed fuel
> medium speed fuel
> high speed fuel
>
> all depends on the thermal cracking process
> during refinement
>
> refinement specs
> all covered by yourA>S>T>M
>
> <american society for testing materials>
>
> go surf it
>
> HEHEHEHEHEHE
>
> all fuels have SMOKE POINTS < including gasoline>
> the tendencies of hydrocarbons to smoke DECREASES in the order of
> aromatics, olephins, branched chain parrafins and straight chain
> parrafins.
>
> napthenes vary in smoking tendency based on molecular weight
>
> additives can be used to reduce smoking.......called organometallic
> compounds
>
> water emulsification above 5 % has also been very effective in raising
> power and reducing smoke
>
> don't believe me
>
> ask your high school chem teacher
>
> hurricane ast
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
> >news:iri8lug9f1rc0busd...@4ax.com...
> >> On Fri, 09 Aug 2002 23:20:43 GMT, "Frank" <fran...@nospamattbi.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Was in London a while ago and had trouble breathing because of all the
> >buses
> >> >and lorries w/deisel power.
> >> >Paris, Seoul, Singapore,Mexico City. Deisel is just as damageing to
the
> >> >humans as gas engines.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> again more babble from wannabees
> >> here are the facts
> >> - diesel has more energy...... BTUs per gallon.....more power per
> >> gallon..higher compression means more energy is EXTRACTED per gallon
> >>
> >> _No pumping loss.....more milage
> >>
> >>
> >> more power/torque...... with load torque increases faster
> >>
> >> as for emissions
> >> because of excess air it emits little or no HC or CO
> >> all fuel combines with O2 and turned to POWER
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> hurricane ast
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >
>
>
Thomas H. Moats
displacement. Meaning if you get 15 mpg with a gas you will get about 19
with a diesel. Diesel engines also produce more NOX as well as higher
amounts of particle emissions. Before electronic fuel injection diesels also
pass more unburned fuel and partially burned fuel at certain RPM and loads.
The government has cracked down hard on the emissions, new engines are
coming out to meet the standard. That standard may decrease the fuel
efficiency of diesels. Many large fleets are now having to worry about
converting the existing fleet or buy new equipment because of the standard.news:3cj8lug2fi9jq82e3...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2002 19:34:13 -0500, Dean Dardwin <d...@dxd.com> wrote:
>
> >Tom,
> >
> >He can't back it up because it isn't true. Catalytic converters remove
> >nearly all the CO. You'll die of old age before you die of CO poisoning.
> >
> >Dean
>
> so you get 2 "old ages" for the price of 1
>
> thats just in pumping loss
> consider total BTUs per gallon an top 50% less pumping loss
>
>
> hurricane ast
>
> >
> >Tom Zweifel wrote:
> >
> >>Alright, I'm raising the BS flag on that one. I'll be the first to
admit
> >>that I'm wrong if proven so, but there is no way in hell you won't die
of
> >>something if you tried that, and I'd be inclined put carbon monoxide
> >>poisoning at the top of my post mortem list.
> >>
> >>Why would you say that diesel exhaust won't hurt you and why would you
claim
> >>that diesel exhaust wouldn't contain a significant if not lethal
quantity of
> >>carbon monoxide?
> >>
> >>Again, I'm not being confrontational or insulting here, just please
provide
> >>something to back that one up.
> >>
> >>
Thomas H. Moats
Thomas H. Moats
but certain areas of Canada.
"Jinxter" <shay...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jH759.10562$2k.8...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Thomas H. Moats
http://www.northstar.sierraclub.org/Air_Toxics_Diesel_engine_rule.htm
http://www.signonsandiego.com/marketplace/rvcenter/001104gas.html
http://www.internationaldelivers.com/news_room/press_releases_vehicle/press_
062701_diesel_data_v3_no2.htmnews:SE%49.10512$27.2...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
Thomas H. Moats
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 17:58:51 -0700, Checkmate <Lunati...@The.Edge>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >On Fri, 09 Aug 2002 23:02:43 GMT, Steve Barker put forth the notion
that...
> >
> >> BUT the fact of the matter is that the diesels are more efficient, and
you
> >> can breathe that stink all day and it won't hurt you.
> >
> >Diesel exhaust is loaded with particulates and carcinogens.
> >
>
>
> what does that do??
>
> sulpher contents have been reduced
> as well as most modern diesels have greatly reduced
> particulate emission
>
>
> sorry you loose
>
> hurricane ast
>
>
>
>
> >
> >> Try running your SUV
> >> (mall terrain vehicle) in the garage and see what happens. With a
diesel,
> >> you'll never die of carbon monoxide poisoning.
> >>
> >> --
> >> ===============
> >> Steve
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, I top post. Deal with it or ignore it.
> >>
> >>
Budd Cochran
I've driven Cummins inlines (dump trucks) and one ( 1) Navistar V-8.
(similar capacity van body) The V-8 felt like a gas V-8 except it couldn't
wind to 5000 rpm, in other words, it sucked under load. It kept me shifting
even when empty.
V configurations need rpm to make horsepower as the torque band tend to be
peaky. Inlines give broader torque bands.
--
Budd Cochran
79 D-150
52 Cushman RoadKing
<Mike...@ylcos.com> wrote in message news:3D5423B0...@ylcos.com...
> You certainly are entitled to your opinion, but is that of a
> rather small minority. Ford sells a hell of a lot more V8
> diesels than Dodge sell sixes and Fords quality rates far exceed
> those of Dodge..
>
>
> mike hunt
>
> Jacob Suter wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, but I want nothing to do with V-layout diesels. The idea behind
a
> > diesel is for the engine not to suck.
> >
> > I'd take an I4 diesel over a V6 diesel any day.
> >
> > Then again, Longevity isn't job #1 at ford.
> >
> > JS
> >
> > <Mike...@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> > news:3D53CEA0...@mailcity.com...
> > > Ford has two new diesel engines coming on line in 2003, a V6 and
> > > a smaller V8 that will be available in the F150 and Expedition
> > > and Aviator. Navistar built a whole new plant to make the engine
> > > exclusively for Ford. Ford owns a big piece of Cummins but uses
> > > Navistar engines because the believe they are a better product.
> > >
> > > mike
> > >
> > > Jacob Suter wrote:
> > > >
> > > > No, you'll be seeing cummins and hyundai diesels in D/C vehicles.
> > > >
> > > > the I4 3.9L turbo from cummins is a great workhorse. It'll hang
with a
> > 318
> > > > while consuming just over half as much fuel, and much more low-end
> > torque.
> > > >
> > > > They sell the dakota and durango with that engine in Mexico, and
> > possibly
> > > > the ram 1500, also.
> > > >
> > > > I'd love to see some competition in this department, and not
> > pseudo-SUV's
> > > > like the new VW "SUV" (station wagon with a lift kit) diesel - but a
> > real,
> > > > mid-size (Explorerish, the Durango is crap so it doesn't really
count,
> > maybe
> > > > the TrailBlazer but, heh, GM... ok, the sequoia) SUV with a good
diesel
> > > > option.
> > > >
> > > > Of course, the EPA (also known as the "Petrolium Profit Generation
> > > > Association") wouldn't allow this, claiming emissions were too high,
but
> > in
> > > > reality the petrol companies would cry since we'd suddenly only need
> > > > low-grade (diesel doesn't require near the refinement as gasoline,
for
> > even
> > > > the highest quality diesel) fuel in large quantities.
> > > >
> > > > Then there is the whole bio-diesel issue - real good stuff if you
ask
> > me.
> > > > Surplus and waste supplies turned into usable fuel. Then of course,
you
> > can
> > > > run a limited mixture of used motor oil, which (depending on
> > manufacturer
> > > > suggestion) can add life to the fuel system, especially the boost
pump.
> > > >
> > > > JS
> > > >
> > > > "sw" <urri...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:kfm6lug39c8hd5009...@4ax.com...
> > > > > for what passes as progress. :(
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'm still waiting for little diesels to power the Dakotas,
> > Durangos,
> > > > > >Tahoes,
> > > > > >> Explorers, etc......
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I wouldn't think they could "give" these vehicles away if they
were
> > > > powered
> > > > > >by your "little diesels" I certainly wouldn't want one.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > hehehehe
> > > > > a diesel is more environmentally friendly
> > > > > dont be surprised
> > > > > escpecially since daimler chrysler
> > > > > you may see them
> > > > >
> > > > > hurricane ast
Budd Cochran
The oxygen levels would drop because of the combustion process if the CO2
doesn't get you.
--
Budd Cochran
79 D-150
52 Cushman RoadKing
"Steve Barker" <railph...@hotmail.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:nSX49.10226$mj7.2...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> BUT the fact of the matter is that the diesels are more efficient, and you
> can breathe that stink all day and it won't hurt you. Try running your
SUV
> (mall terrain vehicle) in the garage and see what happens. With a diesel,
> you'll never die of carbon monoxide poisoning.
>
> --
> ===============
> Steve
>
> Remove the "nospam" from my address to abuse my email box.
>
> Yes, I top post. Deal with it or ignore it.
>
>
> "Rick Blaine" <fern...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:8OX49.122787$f05.6...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
> > Never happen. Unless gas prices rise to european levels. Who likes
> driving
> > behind stinky oil burners?
> > "A. Mueller-Witt" <muew...@yahoo.de> wrote in message
> > news:aj13g4$o0k$00$1...@news.t-online.com...
> > > hohoho,
> > > this time I agree with you. About 80% of all SUVs and Vans sold in
> Europe
> > > are diesel-powered. Not without reason. America will follow.
> > > Andreas
> > >
Backyard Mechanic
something?
And dont tell us there's nothing to do there.
"sw" <urri...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
news:2hi8lukocoi61h99n...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2002 20:18:56 GMT, Mike...@ylcos.com wrote:
>
> >You certainly are entitled to your opinion, but is that of a
> >rather small minority. Ford sells a hell of a lot more V8
> >diesels than Dodge sell sixes and Fords quality rates far exceed
> >those of Dodge..
> >
> having worked for dodge and ford
> ford will cost you big $$$$
>
> again more bogus advice
>
> the cummings is a far better unit
> truth is you have NEVER WORKED on either
> and you just babbling
>
>
> hurricane ast
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >> > > > a diesel is more environmentally friendly
Budd Cochran
--
Budd Cochran
79 D-150
52 Cushman RoadKing
"Rick Blaine" <fern...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:_1059.123912$f05.6...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
Rob Hall
"Bob" <rwknu...@charter.com> wrote in message
news:ul6c0fs...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "MrDancer" <mrda...@cox.your.underwear.net> wrote in message
> news:HmF49.7272$SE1...@news1.central.cox.net...
> > "Grover C. McCoury III" wrote in message...
> > > TRAVERSE CITY, Mich., Aug 8 (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co.'s goal of
> > > increasing the fuel efficiency of its sport utility vehicles by 25
> > > percent in five years has become tougher because some new fuel-saving
> > > techniques have failed to live up to expectations, Ford's
environmental
> > > chief said on Thursday.
> >
> > I wonder if they ever considered making the vehicles lighter in weight?
> God
> > forbid they drop the heighth on them to get back some of the handling
and
> > MPG!
> >
> > A classic example is Jeep... they replaced their Cherokee with a vehicle
> > that is taller, much heavier, and (duh!) gets worse MPG - it's the price
> we
> >
> > I'm still waiting for little diesels to power the Dakotas, Durangos,
> Tahoes,
> > Explorers, etc......
>
> I wouldn't think they could "give" these vehicles away if they were
powered
> by your "little diesels" I certainly wouldn't want one.
>
Why not? A diesel makes a lot of sense in an SUV. Better mileage, more
low-end torque for pulling, etc.
Rob
Rob Hall
"Frank" <fran...@nospamattbi.com> wrote in message
news:7UO49.58613$uj.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> Tell me. Where the frell did you learn to speak english?
> If you say that you didnt I would understand.
>
>
What is 'frell'?
Rob Hall
"Jerry Hamilton" <j...@hemc.net> wrote in message
news:zIF49.124456$vg.51...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> So their answer is to stop building the Excursion!
It's going to be replaced with a long-wheelbase Expedition.
Rob
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Diesels are approximately 30% more efficient than a gas engine of the same
>displacement. Meaning if you get 15 mpg with a gas you will get about 19
>with a diesel. Diesel engines also produce more NOX as well as higher
>amounts of particle emissions. Before electronic fuel injection diesels also
>pass more unburned fuel and partially burned fuel at certain RPM and loads.
>The government has cracked down hard on the emissions, new engines are
>coming out to meet the standard. That standard may decrease the fuel
>efficiency of diesels. Many large fleets are now having to worry about
>converting the existing fleet or buy new equipment because of the standard.
>"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
HEHEHEHE
thomas
you fucked up again
heat produces NOX
before I slam you please
reread deiesel fuel refinement< thermal cracking>
and LIST the 3 types of DIESEL
which one would have AUTO preferance
what temp does it BURN?
with referance to unburned fuel
heheheh
imposssable....think about it
its a DIESEL
better get some training in diesel
HEHEHEHE
then
Backyard Mechanic
If you made all the SUV's that DONT need, or ever really use, 4wd into 2wd,
you'd meet the gas reqs.
My brother searched for months to find a decent used 2wd suburban.. and he
gets a REAL_WORLD 15mpg.
"Cory Dunkle" <adg...@NO.SPAMcomcast.net> wrote
>I mean really, who buys a SUV with leather seats? You can't use
> the thing if it's got leather! I wouldn't want to get into my truck's
> leather seats while covered in dirt and mud from work or play. What about
> all these automatic things like automatic folding seats? I'm sure that
adds
> more weight over a normal seat that you can just take out. Anyway, why not
> remove some of the useless junk in the SUV and basically cut the fat...
Backyard Mechanic
"MrDancer" <mrda...@cox.your.underwear.net> wrote
> > Have you actually weighed your Galaxie? I'll bet it's well over
4000#'s.
>
> Don't know about the Galaxy, but...
>
> My first ride was a '67 Plymouth Fury. Pretty good-sized car, four-door
> with big-block V8. According to sticker, it weighed in at 3700 lbs. It
got
> around 18 mpg.
>
> I had a '76 Charger SE that was considerably more luxurious than the Fury,
> also seemed to be larger and more heavily built, and it also had a
big-block
> V8. It weighed in at 4000 lbs. It got around 18 mpg.
Imperial Gals, maybe.
Mike...@mailcity.com
that you can be over come without being killed in that situation.
Apparently a number of people who have tried commit suicide in
that way failed in their attempt. There is enough carbon
monoxide to cause brain damage from lack of oxygen, since red
corpuscles have an affinity for carbon monoxide, but not enough
to prove fatal. ;)
mike hunt
Steve Barker wrote:
>
> BUT the fact of the matter is that the diesels are more efficient, and you
> can breathe that stink all day and it won't hurt you. Try running your SUV
> (mall terrain vehicle) in the garage and see what happens. With a diesel,
> you'll never die of carbon monoxide poisoning.
>
> --
> ===============
> Steve
>
Roy
applications under adverse conditions than the navistar. Whether or not ford
sells more trucks is really not relevant as to which is the better and more
reliable engine. I'd be the first to go to a Chevy or ford if they had a
Cummins in it. If something were to go wrong with my Cummins I can take it
to a Cummins dealer where all they do is work on diesel's and nothing else.
With the Navistar, if the tech that went to the familiarization class is on
vacation you get the guy who just changed the horn on a Taurus. Thanks, but
no thanks.
Roy
<Mike...@ylcos.com> wrote in message news:3D5423B0...@ylcos.com...
> You certainly are entitled to your opinion, but is that of a
> rather small minority. Ford sells a hell of a lot more V8
> diesels than Dodge sell sixes and Fords quality rates far exceed
> those of Dodge..
>
>
> > > > > for what passes as progress. :(
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'm still waiting for little diesels to power the Dakotas,
> > Durangos,
> > > > > >Tahoes,
> > > > > >> Explorers, etc......
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I wouldn't think they could "give" these vehicles away if they
were
> > > > powered
> > > > > >by your "little diesels" I certainly wouldn't want one.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > hehehehe
> > > > > a diesel is more environmentally friendly
R. J. Talley
fuel in an engine at least some CO is produced. Ask anyone who has served on
a diesel sub the dangers of CO poisoning and diesel engines. CATs do scrub
it clean that's for sure and they do work better when they are warm but to
say that diesels do not produce CO is just plain wrong.
Carcinogens...again, all hydrocarbon fuels produce waste that is
cancer-causing to some degree. Shoot, the smoke from a wood fire is
carcinogenic. What researchers worry about with diesel is that the particles
emitted are of such size and volume as to lodge fairly deeply in the lungs;
a location where they can do a lot of damage. There is also some concern
about these particles along with unburned oil, washing from our streets and
into our watershed. So while they may not harm the air, diesel exhaust may
in fact, harm the water and land.
One point of diesel exhaust that does not require a Ph.D. to observe is that
it is very caustic. In combination with water vapor, diesel exhaust changes
into sulfuric acid. One can easily observe this just by looking at the back
of a public bus and noting how faded the paint is. The concern here is that
an increase in diesel usage would in turn result in an increase in the "acid
rain" phenomena that has been eating away at all things concrete.
I have no real point to this post other than to make sure that certain
misinformation that has been posted is properly challenged. So now that I've
done that I just shut up and be a good boy.
"Steve Barker" <railph...@hotmail.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:SE%49.10512$27.2...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
- remove !@#$&change$tos William R. Walsh
As far as I know, it's a kinder way to say the "f" word.
William
Rob Hall
"William R. Walsh" <!@#$wwalsh@mch$i.com - remove !@#$ & change $ to S>
wrote in message news:YBb59.80112$D36.74293@rwcrnsc53...
> > What is 'frell'?
>
> As far as I know, it's a kinder way to say the "f" word.
>
> William
>
>
like 'feckin' and 'fookin'.
Rob
Thomas H. Moats
diesels produce about 30% more nox than a gas engine at high loads. It has
very little to do with the fuel. It has a lot do with the air it uses and
the combustion temperatures. Think about it.
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
news:bc8aluclet52tevrk...@4ax.com...
MrDancer
news:3d552374$0$1426$272e...@news.execpc.com...
Nope, good ol' U.S. gallons.
Thomas H. Moats
> On Sat, 10 Aug 2002 01:34:24 GMT, "Frank" <fran...@nospamattbi.com>
> wrote:
>
> fuel for diesel is divides into 3 categories
> slow speed fuel
> medium speed fuel
> high speed fuel
>
You mean three classes of diesel engines.
Low speed 150-450 RPM ( ships, electricity generation )
Medium speed 450-1000 RPM ( electricity generation, pumpline pumps,
railroad )
High speed 1000 + RPM ( Transportation )
Fuel is divided in two categories, transportation use, off road use.
> all depends on the thermal cracking process
> during refinement
>
> refinement specs
> all covered by yourA>S>T>M
>
> <american society for testing materials>
>
> go surf it
>
> HEHEHEHEHEHE
>
> all fuels have SMOKE POINTS < including gasoline>
> the tendencies of hydrocarbons to smoke DECREASES in the order of
> aromatics, olephins, branched chain parrafins and straight chain
> parrafins.
>
> napthenes vary in smoking tendency based on molecular weight
>
> additives can be used to reduce smoking.......called organometallic
> compounds
>
> water emulsification above 5 % has also been very effective in raising
> power and reducing smoke
>
> don't believe me
>
> ask your high school chem teacher
>
> hurricane ast
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
Mike...@mailcity.com
The fact that more people by Fords with diesels did change
however. If most people felt as you do they would be buying
Dodges, not Fords. So your opinion, although well intended,
is still that of a minority.
mike
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>news:lro8lu0302kq1kpnc...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 10 Aug 2002 01:34:24 GMT, "Frank" <fran...@nospamattbi.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> fuel for diesel is divides into 3 categories
>> slow speed fuel
>> medium speed fuel
>> high speed fuel
>>
>
>You mean three classes of diesel engines.
>Low speed 150-450 RPM ( ships, electricity generation )
>Medium speed 450-1000 RPM ( electricity generation, pumpline pumps,
>railroad )
>High speed 1000 + RPM ( Transportation )
>
>Fuel is divided in two categories, transportation use, off road use.
>
wrong again thomas
a high speed diesel is on that operates above 3000 rpm
and hehehe
DIESEL
fuel is divided into 3 types
grade flash pt, bs&w% ccr <10%> ash% vicosity cetane
d1 100F trace .15 .o1 1.4 40
d2 125 .1 . .35 .02 5.8 40
d3 130 .5 ..... .1 26 30
hehehe moats
GO TO SCHOOL
be learned
hurricane ast
dw
On Sat, 10 Aug 2002 17:08:37 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>So go ahead, lets see what shit you come up with this time. It is a fact
>diesels produce about 30% more nox than a gas engine at high loads. It has
>very little to do with the fuel. It has a lot do with the air it uses and
>the combustion temperatures. Think about it.
30% hehehehehehe
it aint no fact
you will find that diesels have LESS nox than GASOLINE
read some teck manuals
and think about this
MORE EFFICIENT means LESS FUEL BURNT......LESS EMMISSIONS
hehehe
be learned
your 30% smarter now
dw
>We already know your opinion, you stated it in a previous post.
>The fact that more people by Fords with diesels did change
>however. If most people felt as you do they would be buying
>Dodges, not Fords. So your opinion, although well intended,
>is still that of a minority.
>
>
>mike
>
the fact that you never worked on, owned and are not a licenced teck
is that of an IDIOT
basing your opinion on a consumer report you read is even dumber
hurricane ast
Thomas H. Moats
Back up you shit.news:n3bbluopetbr5i53v...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
emissions, and that under certain loads make more. Quit spouting BS.news:iccblucjqofu04946...@4ax.com...
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>I noticed you did not respond to the sites that show diesels do make nitrous
>emissions, and that under certain loads make more. Quit spouting BS.
I never checked any of your sites
all hc combustion makes nitrous
common chemistry
something you dident take
as for producing more
HEHEHE
I call BULLSHIT
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Really? "Collage" boy, show some references that can be show via web site.
>Back up you shit.
do your own work
are you claiming that I MADE UP
the the chart and numbers PREV POSTED
HEHEHEHE
sometimes moats you have to go to school
or write southern alberta insitute of technology
as about programs in chemistry and pertrolium refinement
BETTER YET CONTACT YOUR LOCAL PETROL SUPPLIER
hehehehehehehe
Thomas H. Moats
out of context and left out other "cracking" methods in the refinement of
fossil fuels, in error said that high speed diesel engines start at 3000
rpm. Surely with your red seal and "collage" education you can do more that
put down a few numbers and call it different fuels.news:gndbluorpciu2cv20...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 00:35:26 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >Really? "Collage" boy, show some references that can be show via web
site.
> >Back up you shit.
>
> do your own work
> are you claiming that I MADE UP
> the the chart and numbers PREV POSTED
>
Wow! I claimed you made up numbers after you posted this and before I read
it................
> HEHEHEHE
>
> sometimes moats you have to go to school
> or write southern alberta insitute of technology
>
Been to school, been to college, again that's how I know you are full of
shit. I have shown that in past posts, current and will show in future.
Rick Blaine
"Budd Cochran" <mr-...@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:ula6fge...@corp.supernews.com...
clevere
less harmful emissions than gas engines do. It's a fact, take a look at
some of the goverment sites
"Thomas H. Moats" <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:QJ759.183724$nm.71...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> Diesels are approximately 30% more efficient than a gas engine of the same
> displacement. Meaning if you get 15 mpg with a gas you will get about 19
> with a diesel. Diesel engines also produce more NOX as well as higher
> amounts of particle emissions. Before electronic fuel injection diesels
also
> pass more unburned fuel and partially burned fuel at certain RPM and
loads.
> The government has cracked down hard on the emissions, new engines are
> coming out to meet the standard. That standard may decrease the fuel
> efficiency of diesels. Many large fleets are now having to worry about
> converting the existing fleet or buy new equipment because of the
standard.
> "dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
clevere
"Thomas H. Moats" <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:g5859.183876$nm.71...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg286.htm
> "dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
> news:72m8lu0uqa92ipb2s...@4ax.com...
> > On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 17:58:51 -0700, Checkmate <Lunati...@The.Edge>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >On Fri, 09 Aug 2002 23:02:43 GMT, Steve Barker put forth the notion
> that...
> > >
> > >> BUT the fact of the matter is that the diesels are more efficient,
and
> you
> > >> can breathe that stink all day and it won't hurt you.
> > >
> > >Diesel exhaust is loaded with particulates and carcinogens.
> > >
> >
> >
> > car exhaust emits more nox
> > what does that do??
> >
> > sulpher contents have been reduced
> > as well as most modern diesels have greatly reduced
> > particulate emission
> >
> >
> > sorry you loose
> >
> > hurricane ast
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >> Try running your SUV
> > >> (mall terrain vehicle) in the garage and see what happens. With a
> diesel,
> > >> you'll never die of carbon monoxide poisoning.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> ===============
> > >> Steve
> > >>
Thomas H. Moats
current are. Diesels do produce more of some types of harmful emissions than
gas.
http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/ebd/chap1.asp#fig1
There are fewer diesels than gas in the states, yet diesels produce 26% of
the total amount of NOX ( and this was in 95, so the number has more than
likely grown ), pretty big number for a "clean" engine of smaller quantities
than a gas engine.
"clevere" <clev...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:grj59.55673$nF5.14444@sccrnsc02...
Jim
>the fact that you never worked on, owned and are not a licenced teck
>is that of an IDIOT
The above statement isn't?
>
>basing your opinion on a consumer report you read is even dumber
Base it on the above referenced statement instead.
Jim
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>news:jsdblug42vhp312en...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 00:35:26 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
>> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Really? "Collage" boy, show some references that can be show via web
>site.
>> >Back up you shit.
>>
>> do your own work
>That is how I know you are full of shit. I do my own work.
>
>> are you claiming that I MADE UP
>> the the chart and numbers PREV POSTED
>>
>Wow! I claimed you made up numbers after you posted this and before I read
>it................
please post how one would do a smoke test?
Please tell me the color of diesel for high speed diesel
please tell me the color of diesel for medium speed diesel
please tell me the color of diesel for slow speed diesell
what is the purpose of a color disc?
hehehehe
you lack the chemistry smarts??
just because you cant but d3 in your country
does not mean that it is called d3 in another
like new zealand where the grade is lower
you have class yanks call it fuel oil
HEHEHEHE
be learned
if you had your RED SEAL CERTIFICATION
you are WANTED WORLD WIDE
hurricane ast
knowledge is POWER
or was that diesel is power?
hurricane ast
dw
wrote:
>that was also 2 years ago in the UK
moats is an idiot and parrot
he is about to learn about diesel
I like the more nox part
hey moats are you sure its not a slow speed diesel?
they are prone to knox
but a high speed??
hehehehe
fuck are you dumb
hehehehehe
hurricane ast
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Yes diesels are more efficient than gas, and can be more efficient than
>current are. Diesels do produce more of some types of harmful emissions than
>gas.
>
>http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/ebd/chap1.asp#fig1
>
>There are fewer diesels than gas in the states, yet diesels produce 26% of
>the total amount of NOX ( and this was in 95, so the number has more than
>likely grown ), pretty big number for a "clean" engine of smaller quantities
>than a gas engine.
>
>
boats pumps trains busses trucks ships
POWER PLANTS
yup mimagine if they buirnt gas
figure the cost of energy if gas was used
hehehehe
you numbers are bogus
hehehehe
hurricane ast
dw
>in fact, harm the water and land.
>
>One point of diesel exhaust that does not require a Ph.D. to observe is that
>it is very caustic. In combination with water vapor, diesel exhaust changes
>into sulfuric acid. One can easily observe this just by looking at the back
>of a public bus and noting how faded the paint is. The concern here is that
>an increase in diesel usage would in turn result in an increase in the "acid
>rain" phenomena that has been eating away at all things concrete.
>
gotr that rite
why does that chrome wheel turn green on a 97 ford f150
right rear tire when tail pipe was ahaead of tire ?
why did ford reroute the pipes
hehehe
GOT YA
huirricane ast
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg286.htm
>"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>news:iri8lug9f1rc0busd...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 09 Aug 2002 23:20:43 GMT, "Frank" <fran...@nospamattbi.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Was in London a while ago and had trouble breathing because of all the
>buses
>> >and lorries w/deisel power.
>> >Paris, Seoul, Singapore,Mexico City. Deisel is just as damageing to the
>> >humans as gas engines.
>> >
>>
>>
yup no emmission laws
look at the grade of diesel they burn
could it be type D3
GOT YA
HEHEHEHEHEHEHE
wasent L.A .CLEAR at one time
your laws just slowed the process
any whay bother flapping off
did not the US fail to comply with the
latest world wide emmision agreements
hehehehe
got you AGAIN
hurricane ast
dw
<mr-...@citlink.net> wrote:
>Bull.
>
>The oxygen levels would drop because of the combustion process if the CO2
>doesn't get you.
bull not enough to kill you
unless you unless you hook the tailpipe to a gasmask
do you happen to ride you bike and jog downtown?
how are your lungs?
when i am around brake dust I wear a mask
you jog in it
hehehehe
IDIOT
hurricane ast
Roy
My opinion is that Cummins makes a more reliable engine than Navistar. The
sale of trucks have nothing to do with that. That isn't actually an opinion,
sales prove it.
Roy
<Mike...@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:3D55845C...@mailcity.com...
clevere
You seem to be somewhat knowledgeable.. But for havens sake, learn how
to spell, please...
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
news:lumblu0egc66quql4...@4ax.com...
dw
wrote:
>Dw -
> You seem to be somewhat knowledgeable.. But for havens sake, learn how
>to spell, please...
youi dont understand
you see rhis newsgroup has the 3 stooges..
moats, .......nelson and .........hack
I let them think they are superior
so i let them bitch about spelling
its a bitch............ rite moats
beiing showed up by a guy who cant spell
hehehehehe
hurricane ast
Thomas H. Moats
D-2 is for warm climates.
Neither one has to do with speed. You are so full of shit. Go back to
"collage".news:tlhblucv8okuks21u...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
exactly what I said. Diesels produce more NOX under load than gas engines.
Prove me wrong if you can, back up what you say, you know you can't.news:r07clu0bj4s5gtis6...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
Thomas H. Moats
Backyard Mechanic
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote
> the fact that you never worked on, owned and are not a licenced teck
> is that of an IDIOT
>
...
> hurricane ast
Referring to another thread... if you were a doc, you would probably have
your precious license yanked by now.. is there a sort of malpractice review
board in Canuck auto-mech-land?
Backyard Mechanic
The operative being "seem to be" knowledgable.
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
news:r07clu0bj4s5gtis6...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 02:13:52 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >Yes diesels are more efficient than gas, and can be more efficient than
> >current are. Diesels do produce more of some types of harmful emissions
than
> >gas.
> >
> >http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/ebd/chap1.asp#fig1
> >
> >There are fewer diesels than gas in the states, yet diesels produce 26%
of
> >the total amount of NOX ( and this was in 95, so the number has more than
> >likely grown ), pretty big number for a "clean" engine of smaller
quantities
> >than a gas engine.
> >
> >
> boats pumps trains busses trucks ships
> POWER PLANTS
Power plants? Get real, most are coal fired ( yes, still produces nitrate
emissions ), stand by generators are mainly diesel, and are run at power
outages and normal maintenance checks.
>
> yup mimagine if they buirnt gas
High percentage do, it's called natural gas. Many coal fired are being
converted to gas as well.
> figure the cost of energy if gas was used
>
> hehehehe
> you numbers are bogus
Really? Prove it.
>
> hehehehe
> hurricane ast
Thomas H. Moats
U.S. diesel manufactures have adopted the standard and are implementing it.
The standard was agreed in 1999 as a stepped process, U.S. diesel industry
is in compliance. Your example of New Zealand is laughable. New Zealand is
known around the world as having the worst diesel emissions.
Thomas H. Moats
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 01:11:50 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
> >news:jsdblug42vhp312en...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 00:35:26 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> >> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Really? "Collage" boy, show some references that can be show via web
> >site.
> >> >Back up you shit.
> >>
> >> do your own work
> >That is how I know you are full of shit. I do my own work.
> >
> >> are you claiming that I MADE UP
> >> the the chart and numbers PREV POSTED
> >>
> >Wow! I claimed you made up numbers after you posted this and before I
read
> >it................
>
>
> please post how one would do a smoke test?
Called a "snap test" Snap Acceleration Test, SAE J1667, using opacity
measurement.
> Please tell me the color of diesel for high speed diesel
> please tell me the color of diesel for medium speed diesel
> please tell me the color of diesel for slow speed diesell
Red-Low-sulfur, no tax Clear-Low-sulfur, taxed Blue-High-sulfur, no tax
Application Color of Fuel
Farm Equipment Generally, red or blue; but may use clear and apply for tax
refund.
Off-highway Equipment Same as above.
Private Cars, Trucks Clear. Trucks with refrigeration units may use blue or
clear for refrigeration, and buyer must apply the tax
Buses Red
Government Cars,Trucks Red
Boats Clear
Commercial Blue
Has nothing to do with diesel engine speed, only use.
> what is the purpose of a color disc?
Oh, please "learn me"!
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Yea, right mister 3000+ rpm diesel.
hehehehe
what is redline on a diesel car
heheheh
got ya
race engines can get 10000rpm
hurricane ast
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>news:dfmblu4nua3up452b...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 02:13:52 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
>> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Yes diesels are more efficient than gas, and can be more efficient than
>> >current are. Diesels do produce more of some types of harmful emissions
>than
>> >gas.
>> >
>> >
>
hehehe look you r link is 10 years old
better get the facts
you post babble
now lets slam you
http://www.dieselforum.org/factsheet/dieselemissions.html
ALL ABOUT DIESEL
Diesel technology has some inherent advantages in emissions
performance, and a combination of technical improvements and
regulatory requirements has led to a considerable improvement in
diesel emissions levels over the last two decades.
WHAT IS DIESEL TECHNOLOGY?
For over a century around the world, diesel engines have proved to be
a reliable, economical and durable source of power for many
applications, from pick-up trucks to railroad locomotives, diesel
engines are widely used around the world.
Diesel engines operate differently than gasoline or other
technologies. Diesel engines rely on compression rather than a spark
to ignite a mixture of air and diesel fuel. The mixture of air and
fuel constantly changes to directly respond to the demands or load
placed on an engine. This is why diesel technology is the technology
of choice for virtually all commercial applications, because it
provides the power necessary to transport heavy shipments by truck,
rail, barge or tractor.
Commercial applications like highway trucks, locomotives and
construction equipment demand performance and a source of power that
is efficient, economical, durable and reliable that meets the
requirements of the job, whether hauling 80,000 pounds of food through
the Rocky Mountains or digging the foundation for a new home.
What are the characteristics of Diesel fuel?
Diesel fuel (also known as distillate fuel) contains more energy per
unit volume than gasoline. In addition, diesel is a safer fuel than
gasoline because it is less volatile, and has a higher flashpoint,
making it far less likely to ignite or explode if spilled or released
as a result of an accident.
Combined with the more efficient combustion process of the diesel
engine as compared to gasoline, diesel engines provide for as much as
45 to 60 % better fuel economy.
These characteristics are the reason why one of the greatest hopes for
significant advances in fuel economy in vehicles of the future is the
use of next-generation clean diesel engines.
Diesel Engines and the Environment
Continuous improvement is the term that best describes the
environmental performance of diesel engines. Significant advances in
diesel engine technology have led to considerable improvements in
diesel emissions over the last two decades. Diesel engine
manufacturers and fuel suppliers have worked together to dramatically
reduce emissions from diesel engines while at the same time improving
reliability, durability and fuel efficiency.
Here is a downloadable resource document:
The Role of Diesel Emissions in Overall Air Quality
(.PDF Format -- 48.7K)
The above file is in Adobe Acrobat format. You will need the Adobe
Acrobat Reader in order to view it. If you do not have the Adobe
Acrobat Reader click here to install it.
Evaluation of diesel engine emissions and the environment is based on
two sets of criteria; emissions of greenhouse gas emissions, and EPA
air quality criteria standards - oxides of nitrogen (N0x), sulfur
dioxide (S02), coarse particulate matter (PM-10; smaller than 10
micrometers in diameter) and fine particulates (PM 2.5; particles
smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter).
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Emissions of carbon-based greenhouse gases are of increasing concern
as government and scientists continue to pursue an understanding of
the effect of these emissions on the global climate and temperature
patterns. Because of the greater efficiency of diesel engines and the
significant fuel economy advantage, diesel engines emit 30-35 percent
fewer carbon emissions than gasoline.
DECREASE IN TOTAL OVERALL EMISSIONS:
On-Road Diesel engines -- those used in vehicles operating on roads
such as commercial tractor-trailer trucks, medium size trucks and some
cars and light-duty pick-up trucks have dramatically reduced emissions
over the past 10-15 years despite significant increases in the overall
use of diesel.
In the ten years period from 1989 to 1997:
total NOx emissions from on-road diesels dropped by 25%;
total SO2 emissions from on-road diesels dropped by 76%;
total PM-10 emissions from on-road diesels dropped by 37%; and
total PM-2.5 emissions from on-road diesels have dropped 35% (since
1991, the first year in which data was available).
These improvements in large part are attributed to cleaner diesel
fuel. In its most recent report, the U.S. EPA predicts continued
reductions in diesel emissions, thanks to cleaner, lower sulfur diesel
fuel introduced in 1993 for on-road engines. This new fuel was the
product of a joint agreement and recommendation of engine
manufacturers and fuel suppliers to EPA.
EPA estimates that between 1999 and 2010, total on-road diesel
emissions of NOx will decline an additional 34%; total on-road diesel
emissions of PM-10 will drop an additional 45%; and total on-road VOC
emissions will drop 48%vi.
Off-Road Diesels
Engines in this category cover a wide range of sizes and applications,
but are generally those used in vehicles and equipment not designed
for on-road use, such as bulldozers, farm and construction equipment
and railroad locomotive and marine engines.
Off-road diesel engine emissions are also on the decline.
Particulate emissions from off-road diesels have decreased 25% over
the last 25 years.
Despite the influx of over a million new diesel engines put to work
each yeariii, overall NOx emissions from off-road diesels has remained
roughly constant over the past 15 years.
Clean Diesel Engines of the Future:
Continued improvements in technology and design of the engine coupled
with changes to diesel fuel composition will set the stage for diesel
engines to continue their record of lower emissions and greater fuel
economy while at the same time...
improving performance, reliability and durability.
Diesel engines of the future will use a combination of emission
control options to reduce NOx, PM and HC emissions.
The use of engine design modifications such as cooled exhaust gas
recirculation (EGR), timing retard and higher injection pressures has
translated into a reduction of 80% to 90% in emissions from diesel
engines over the last 20 yearsii.
Several important strategies for on-road heavy-duty diesels include:
Cleaner Diesel Fuel: Diesel fuel sulfur reduction will enable
introduction of after treatment technologies that can further reduce
emissions of PM and NOx emission levels from new and existing engines.
U.S. EPA attributes the expected decrease for overall emissions from
all on-road vehicles to future improvements in diesel fuelsi.
Fuel Delivery: Further improvements to the design and application of
electronic engine controls and improvements to fuel injection
technology will allow the engine to burn fuel more efficiently, and
will avoid the temperature spikes that increase NOx emissions.
Managing Air Intake and Exhaust: Ensuring optimum pressure,
temperature and routing of intake air will help achieve good air-fuel
combustion. Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) is an established
technology on gasoline-powered vehicles that may be effective for
heavy-duty diesels.
After treatment Technologies: Use of catalysts or particulate traps to
convert or capture engine-out emissions before they leave the exhaust
pipe. Traps are used to remove and eventually burn particulate
emissions. Catalysts for diesel engines are more complex than their
counterparts in gasoline engines, but hold promise for reducing NOx
and particulate emissions by conversion to less-harmful compounds.
i. Jason Mark and Candace Morey, "Diesel Passenger Vehicles and the
Environment" Union of Concerned Scientists, April 1999
ii. Jason Mark and Candace Morey, "Diesel Passenger Vehicles and the
Environment" Union of Concerned Scientists, April 1999
iii. 64 Fed. Reg. 26142, 26143 (May, 1999)(Advanced Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking).
iv. "National Air Pollutant Emission Trends Report, 1900 - 1996 "
United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 454/R-97-011.
v. "Emission Control Potential for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines" EPA
420-F-95-009b (June, 1996).
vi. "National Air Pollutant Emission Trends Report, 1900 - 1996 "
United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 454/R-97-011.
©2000-2002 Diesel Technology Forum. All Rights Reserved.
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>news:dfmblu4nua3up452b...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 02:13:52 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
>> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Yes diesels are more efficient than gas, and can be more efficient than
>> >current are. Diesels do produce more of some types of harmful emissions
>than
>> >gas.
>> >
heheheh
hey moats when you do RESEARCH
use new text books
HEHEHEHE
QUOTES...
WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT DIESEL
"Diesel engines are all the rage in the car game at present and no
right thinking automaker can be without one."
Essex Chronicle (UK)
(June 27, 2002)
"The diesel boom goes on, with a huge move towards diesel sales in the
UK in the last 18 months."
UK Newsquest
(June 23, 2002)
"Millions of motorists are waking up to the wonders of diesel."
Graeme Lennox and Avril Cadden
Scottish Sunday Mail
(June 23, 2002)
"You will cut the cost of motoring if you join the diesel revolution."
Graeme Lennox and Avril Cadden
Scottish Sunday Mail
(June 23, 2002)
"Gone are the days of the smoke-spewing hulks that droned up and down
our highways."
Graeme Lennox and Avril Cadden
Scottish Sunday Mail
(June 23, 2002)
"Today's diesels are quieter, cleaner, nippier and more enjoyable to
drive than the clunky engines of 10 years ago."
Irish News
(June 19, 2002)
"All in all, this move to diesel looks quite promising-everyone's
optimistic, Houston's on its way to having much cleaner air..."
Austin American Statesman
(June 17, 2002)
"If diesel accounted for only 30 percent of California's fleet of
motor vehicles, estimates are that fuel consumed by vehicles in
California could be cut in half"
Rep. John D. Dingell (D-MI) in his June 6 address to the Subcommittee
on Oversight and Investigations
(June 6, 2002)
"Diesel is the way of the future, and I am hopeful that it's
short-term benefits will not be overlooked by the Administration or
the Congress, even as we examine longer term strategies."
Rep. John D. Dingell (D-MI) in his June 6 address to the Subcommittee
on Oversight and Investigations
(June 6, 2002)
"It's more a question of can you afford not to do it."
Harris County (TX) Judge Robert Eckels, on the cost of convertingg
Houston's Department of Transportation fleet to clean diesel to
improve air quality
as quoted in the Associated Press
"In Europe, car makers have agreed to lower their carbon dioxide
emissions and the biggest building block for that is diesel - I don't
see that changing."
JD Power analyst Al Bedwell
as quoted in Planet Ark (May 31, 2002)
"When drivers in North America think of diesel, they still think of
loud trucks belching black smoke, but today's diesels are leaner,
cleaner and quieter."
Dave Szczupak, Navistar International
as quoted in the Associated Press (May 29, 2002)
"Diesels have come a long way in a short time."
Macarthur Chronicle (Australia) (May 28, 2002)
"The advancement of diesel engines, in power, smoothness, fuel economy
and emissions has been strong over the past year or so and unless a
manufacturer has a new-generation diesel, they'll be left behind."
Stuart Innes
The Advertiser (Australia) (May 25, 2002)
"People barely notice the difference between diesel and petrol these
days."
Luke Bosdet, AA of the UK
Daily Star (May 10, 2002)
"In these days of high fuel prices, can there be better justification
for switching to diesel?"
"Forget Everything You Ever Heard: Diesel isn't Dull"
The Irish Times (May 8, 2002)
"The new-wave (diesel fuel injection) process results in passenger
cars that are as quick and quiet as their petroleum -fuelled
counterparts, but with astonishing fuel economy."
"New Diesels Do It Better"
Perth Sunday Times (May 5, 2002)
"Technology beat the clatter and smoke of diesel car engines. It's
time for a U.S. comeback."
Michelle Krebs
Popular Science (April 2002)
"In the past decade, diesel technology has revved ahead."
Michelle Krebs
Popular Science (April 2002)
"I think the best alternative fuels is one we already have, but this
country doesn't want to produce: No. 1 refined diesel fuel."
Jay Leno, "Driving Fuelishly"
Popular Mechanics (April 2002)
"Just as heavy-duty truck buyers already favor diesels for economic
and utility reasons, consumers might make the same decisions if
diesels were more widely available in smaller vehicles."
David Dwight of HyperCar (an affiliate of the Rocky Mountain
Institute)
Fort Worth Star Telegram (April 28, 2002)
"Without fanfare a new class of vehicle is on the rise - the
high-performance diesel."
Andrew Frankel
Sunday Times of London (April 28, 2002)
"However oxymoronic it may sound, the high performance diesel is not
simply here to stay, it will in time assume as great a presence on
(UK) roads as its petrol powered equivalents."
Andrew Frankel
Sunday Times of London (April 28, 2002)
"Clean diesel seems to be the right choice."
Dana Kauffman, WMATA Board member
Washington Times (April 24, 2002)
"Suddenly there does appear to be a lot of proponents for diesel
engines."
Automotive News (April 22, 2002)
"With gasoline prices as they are and diesel technology forging ahead,
as it should have years ago...sales of the humble oil burner are
taking off as never before."
Phil Bailey
The Montreal Gazette (April 12, 2002)
"Our political leaders have chose to ignore a much simpler and more
immediately available solution (to reduce the U.S. demand for foreign
oil): diesel fuel."
James K. Hammitt and David Ropeik
The Sacramento Bee (April 7, 2002)
"(Sen. John Kerry,) it's time for you and your supporters to end your
knee-jerk opposition to all things diesel."
Warren Brown
Washington Post (March 18, 2002)
"Dramatic improvements in fuel efficiency could be achieved if
Washington allowed automakers to market diesel-powered vehicles."
"Gas And Gasbags... Or, The Open Road And Its Enemies"
National Review (March 25, 2002)
"Today's automobile diesel engine…is a high-tech juggernaut, markedly
more sophisticated than the gasoline engine."
Bill Visnic
"Improved Diesel Engines Sell in Europe, Not Here; The New Breed is
Quieter, Cleaner, More Powerful"
The Plain Dealer (March 7, 2002)
"(This) new breed of diesels combine a blend of refinement,
performance, and economy that has to be experienced to be believed."
Phil Llewellin
"Not Such an Old Diesel Burner"
The Scotsman (March 6, 2002)
"Fuel-efficient diesel-powered cars and trucks, in fact, are
everywhere (in London); and they're not spewing smoky particulate
matter, or creating noise pollution with engine clatter."
Warren Brown
"London a lesson in fuel saving: Brits accept idea they can't gobble
up resources for a song"
Edmonton Journal (February 26, 2002)
"Diesels are far cleaner today than the old black-smoke spewing models
of 30 years ago. Today's models emit 63 percent less nitrogen oxides
(NOx) and 83 percent less soot than in the early 1970s. Diesel engines
can currently match gasoline powered cars in all emission categories
except NOx."
"Diesel, Clean Coal Energy Equal Energy Independence"
Detroit News (February 17, 2002)
"Diesel is the simplest way to accomplish dramatic gains in fuel
efficiency without changing the way America makes or markets vehicles,
and without requiring a new fuel distribution system. Embracing clean
coal and clean diesel as the fuels of the near future is the best way
to cut petroleum consumption without stifling the economy."
"Diesel, Clean Coal Energy Equal Energy Independence"
Detroit News (February 17, 2002)
"Modern diesel engines really are very clean. The old view was that
they emit more nitrous oxides than petrol engines, and chuck out sooty
particulates which are seen as another threat. The truth is that
today's diesel engines have a particulates trap which (they claim)
almost eliminates emissions. The modern diesel engine is cleaner in
every other respect and produces significantly less carbon dioxide,
justifying a lower tax demand."
"Tax and the Pollution Confusion"
UK Newsquest Regional Press-This is Wiltshire (February 10, 2002)
"...Because diesel gets much better mileage, it could become the
favored internal-combustion system in gas-guzzling sport utility
vehicles."
Ben Dobbin
"Diesel Motors to Get a Makeover"
Associated Press (February 3, 2002)
"Virtually everything you did this morning -- the cereal and milk you
had for breakfast, clothes you decided to wear, the car you drove to
work and even how you sent your kids off to school -- involved a
diesel-powered truck or bus. A truck has at some point shipped most
consumer goods in the US, while buses remain critical to transporting
students to and from school."
John S. Hawkins, President of Cloud 9 Shuttle Inc.
"Alternative Fuels and The Marketplace"
The San Diego Union-Tribune (November 20, 2001)
"The latest generation of light-duty diesel engines offers healthy
performance, quiet operation and mileage rates that are upwards of 60
per cent better than equivalent gasoline engines."
Tim Lougheed, Writer
"Clean, Green...Diesel?: North Americans Tend to Shun Diesel-Powered
Cars. But Technology May Be About to Change that Attitude"
The Ottawa Citizen (November 16, 2001)
"The latest diesel cars on offer are all brilliant pieces of
technology. They're no longer slow -- some of them produce more torque
and horsepower than the petrol version, and gradually they have become
the preferred choice for those who are prepared to ignore the old
image of diesels and find out the truth for themselves."
"Taxing Time for Choosing Your Next Car"
UK Newsquest Regional Press (July 25, 2001)
"Diesels will make a big comeback in the United States in the second
half of this decade... Advances in diesel technologies, such as the
common-rail injection systems that make a diesel engine run quieter,
reduce emissions and improve fuel economy, will help U.S. consumers to
accept diesels in light trucks and cars...Virtually every major
vehicle manufacturer is looking at bringing diesel back to the U.S.,
or bringing it for the first time. It is a huge trend."
Thad Males, Director of Alternative Power Technologies at J.D. Power
and Associates, California
"VW Diesel Inventory Wiped Out"
Automotive News (July 23, 2001)
"These and other steps that can be continued and improved will allow
the use of the diesel engine, with its superior fuel consumption, to
continue to benefit society while greatly reducing its negative
environmental and health impacts. The next 10 years can become the
decade of the clean diesel."
Alan Lloyd, Chairman of the California Air Resources Board
"Decade of the Clean Diesel Coming, State Air Regulator Tells Orlando
Meeting"
BNA Daily (July 2001)
"It's hard to judge, but if the industry can resolve such image,
regulatory and other issues, there is a "significant chance" that
diesel-powered vehicles may account for "more than 10%" of annual U.S.
demand for cars and light trucks over the next decade."
Gerhard Schmidt, Ford Motor Co.'s new Research Chief
"Ford Research Head: Diesel Could Grab 10% of U.S. Market"
Wall Street Journal (June 5, 2001)
"Diesel fuel injector systems are the rage in Europe, with 40 percent
of new car registrations being passenger vehicles with diesel
engines."
Kurt Liedtke, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Robert Bosch
Corp./North American operations
"Charleston, S.C., Plant is World's Largest Manufacturer of Fuel
Injectors"
The Post and Courier (Charleston, S.C.) (June 2, 2001)
"Most of the world is diesel friendly. The current EPA regulations
make it very difficult to use diesel technology."
Harry Pearce, GM Vice-Chairman
"More Focus on Diesel..."
Sacramento Bee (June 1, 2001)
"Diesels are trendy. The customers for diesels are younger and more
affluent, and those are the people who are trendsetters."
Thierry Dombreval, Senior Vice President for Marketing at Renault
"It Gets 78 Miles a Gallon, but U.S. Snubs Diesel"
The New York Times (May 27, 2001)
"I believe it is just a matter of time before the United States comes
around to diesel. The technology has moved ahead so much. Fifty miles
to the gallon is normal, and you don't even know you are driving a
diesel."
David W. Thursfield, Chief Executive of Ford of Europe
"It Gets 78 Miles a Gallon, but U.S. Snubs Diesel"
The New York Times (May 27, 2001)
"A liter of diesel takes one farther and produces fewer greenhouse
gases. The big problem with diesel is the small particulates, but we
think that problem can be solved with new particulate filters."
Albrecht Schmidt, top expert on energy issues for Germany's Green
Party
"It Gets 78 Miles a Gallon, but U.S. Snubs Diesel"
The New York Times (May 27, 2001)
"When President George W. Bush unveiled his energy policy, no mention
was made of diesel technology, the lone automotive alternative that
could dramatically curb oil consumption without billions of dollars in
taxpayer subsidies."
Editorial, "Expanding Energy Sources: Diesel..."
The Detroit News (May 27, 2001)
"Diesel-fueled vehicles get 45 to 60 percent better fuel economy than
their gasoline-powered counterparts. Using diesel-powered cars can
save consumers hundreds of dollars yearly."
Editorial, "Expanding Energy Sources: Diesel..."
The Detroit News (May 27, 2001)
"Diesel engines convert fuel to power more efficiently, last longer,
produce more torque and are easier to maintain than their gasoline
counterparts. Historically, diesel fuel also has been cheaper than
gasoline. That's why they are the power plant of choice for 94 percent
of North America's truckers."
Paul McKay, Journalist
"Big Trucks, Big Pollution"
The Vancouver Sun (May 23, 2001)
"Saying no - to diesel engines, nuclear power, energy exploration and
more sport-utility vehicles - isn't an answer. It's a cop out."
Daniel Howes, Automotive Writer
"Diesel Engines Could Help U.S. Beat Fuel Crunch if Feds Wake Up"
The Detroit News (May 22, 2001)
"At the quality end, the cars are just as quick, you do not have to
fill up as often as with a petrol engine, and they are not as noisy as
they used to be. Although diesel is subject to a 3% supplement it is
still cheaper than petrol. This generation of diesel cars is great."
Andrew Cope
Managing Director of Zenith Vehicle Contracts
Financial Director (May 2001)
"Even where the price of diesel and petrol is equal, the sheer quality
of diesel engines is making it the engine of choice because it's a
nicer engine. It's now seen as the intelligent choice."
Charles Moss
JD Power-LMC (UK)
"Carmakers Clamor for Diesel, Leave Smelly Image in Dust"
Dow Jones International News - Chicago Sun Times (April 19, 2001)
"Not only are green-diesel buses cleaner than or equal to natural gas
buses, but they are more cost-effective-a major consideration for
school districts strapped for funding. These new-low-sulfur-fuel
engines reduce particulate emissions by 90 percent, reduce NOx
(nitrogen oxide) by 25 percent over current diesel technology and
reduce hydrocarbon emissions to zero, which makes them competitive to
natural gas buses or even cleaner."
Bob Hattoy, Coalition for Books and Buses
"School Bus Officials Dispute Report on Diesel Exhaust Dangers"
School Transportation News (April 2001)
"In the U.S., people still think diesel engines are slow, loud and
dirty. But now, (a diesel engine) has everything you can expect from a
BMW model. It's sporty and cultivated. And it's more fuel efficient."
Wieland Bruch, BMW spokesman
"BMW Mulls Fresh Crack At Diesel in U.S., Fuel Price Key"
Dow Jones International News (April 19, 2001)
"BMW's diesel engine is arguably better than a petrol engine. You
begin to say, why aren't we all using diesels?"
Chris Will, Auto Analyst at Lehman Brothers (London)
"BMW Mulls Fresh Crack At Diesel in U.S., Fuel Price Key"
Dow Jones International News (April 19, 2001)
"Recent technology has made diesel engines more environmentally sound
and the barrier is a psychological one more than a rational one."
Charles Moss
JD Power-LMC (UK)
"BMW Mulls Fresh Crack At Diesel in U.S., Fuel Price Key"
Dow Jones International News (April 19, 2001)
"Diesel fuel contains more power per unit than gasoline, compressed
natural gas, or liquefied natural gas. Diesel engines, depending on
models compared, use 30 percent to 60 percent less fuel than gasoline
engines. Diesel-electric hybrid vehicles, large and small, generally
get better mileage than gasoline-electric hybrids."
Warren Brown, Writer
"Energy Crisis Could Have its Benefits"
The Washington Post (March 30, 2001)
"Diesel is the lifeblood of commerce in this nation...When you start
tinkering with diesel and its costs, you are going to have an
automatic ripple effect in all segments of the economy. The use of
diesel is pervasive."
Jay McKeeman, Executive Vice President
California Independent Oil Marketers Association
The New York Times (March 1, 2001)
"A diesel unit is considerably more expensive, but fuel cost is
generally a few cents per litre lower and fuel economy is considerably
better than that delivered by gas engines. Diesel engines are
incredibly durable and need less routine maintenance since tuneups and
spark plug changes aren't needed."
Harry Pegg, Journalist
"Fuel For Thought"
The Calgary Sun (March 1, 2001)
"Diesel engines produced today are virtually smokeless and are 90 -
95% cleaner than their counterparts of the 1970's. This means that for
the same amount of emissions, we can now operate 10 modern school or
inner city buses for each single 1970's bus in operation. The
technical breakthroughs of the past few years have gradually increased
the sociability of diesel engines, another important, yet often
unspoken modern requirement."
Dr. Rodica Baranescu
President of SAE International
Chief Engineer of Engine Technology for International Truck and Engine
Co.
SAE Off-Highway Engineering (February, 2001)
"We believe that in the next six or seven years we are going to see a
big penetration of diesel cars and SUV's, because of CAFÉ (fuel
economy standards) and other reasons."
Marge Oge
Director of the EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality
Automotive News (January 1, 2001)
"The diesel is a fairly marvelous invention."
Professor William H. Sutton
School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
University of Oklahoma
"Indeed, diesels have become so clean and efficient that they may even
help propel the next generation of non-gas vehicles."
Michael Arndt
Business Week (November 13, 2000)
"Modern diesel engines have come of age. It was the diesel powered,
Lupo, not a hybrid car, that won the "100 kilometers on 3 litres of
fuel" competition. That a diesel was the first vehicle (clean burning
to boot) to fulfill this challenge from European environmentalists,
and not a hybrid, says it all."
Ed Ring, Journalist
"Green Diesels"
Ecoworld (November 2000)
"New diesels are quicker, quieter, cleaner and fuel efficient. So why
ban them?"
Mark Yost, Journalist
"Engine of Change"
Smart Money (July 2000)
"Besides being fuel-efficient, today's diesels are 90 percent cleaner
than models from 10 years ago. The reason is technology. The new
direct-injection diesels-which account for over 60 percent of new-car
sales in Europe-operate at higher internal pressures, resulting in
more efficient combustion."
Mark Yost, Journalist
"Engine of Change"
Smart Money (July 2000)
"In Europe, diesels already have about a third of the overall market,
and the percentage is rising. A recent report suggested it would reach
40%. Already in France, the Benelux countries and Austria, more than
half the cars use diesels. Why? They use less fuel."
William Diem, Auto Stocks Columnist
Worldyinvestor.com (July 7, 2000)
"Diesel fuel is the lifeblood of California's economy...California's
transportation infrastructure is sustained entirely by the
availability of diesel fuel. Every major industry...agriculture,
manufacturing, timber, retailing, student and public transportation,
emergency services, raw materials movement...depends on diesel fuel."
Joel D. Anderson
Executive Vice President
California Trucking Association
March 30, 1999
Source: Letter to Gov. Gray Davis in opposition to CARB's
California-Only Fuel Standard
"Given what we've learned, with dedicated efforts from manufacturers,
fuel suppliers, and ARB staff, we can expect near-zero emission diesel
within a decade...We're delighted that Californians will be the first
beneficiaries of the world's cleanest diesel technology. The U.S. EPA
must adopt a nationwide, low-sulfur diesel standard for this strategy
to be effective."
Dr. Alan C. Lloyd
Chairman, California Air Resources Board
October 6, 1999
Source: CARB press release urging a reduction in diesel pollution by
75%
'
dw
>> >>
>> >Wow! I claimed you made up numbers after you posted this and before I
>read
>> >it................
>>
>>
>> please post how one would do a smoke test?
>
>Called a "snap test" Snap Acceleration Test, SAE J1667, using opacity
>measurement.
>
FAIL
smoke test
20 ml sample..wick is placed in, and ignited so flame is 1 cm high
flame lowered until smoke dissapears
height of flame indicates smoke point
hehehe
>> Please tell me the color of diesel for high speed diesel
>> please tell me the color of diesel for medium speed diesel
>> please tell me the color of diesel for slow speed diesell
>
>
>Red-Low-sulfur, no tax Clear-Low-sulfur, taxed Blue-High-sulfur, no tax
>
>Application Color of Fuel
>Farm Equipment Generally, red or blue; but may use clear and apply for tax
>refund.
>Off-highway Equipment Same as above.
>Private Cars, Trucks Clear. Trucks with refrigeration units may use blue or
>clear for refrigeration, and buyer must apply the tax
>Buses Red
>Government Cars,Trucks Red
>Boats Clear
>Commercial Blue
>
>Has nothing to do with diesel engine speed, only use.
>
hehehe
FAIL
flash point between grade d1 d2 d3 and yes thomas even d4
is diffrent
flasho point for high speed diesel is100-130F medspeed and slow speed
have higher flash point
thus d1 and d2 are used for high speed diesel
flash points for d3 d4 are higher and are for LOW SPEES DIESEL
please research and post specs that contradict the flash pt spec and
low speed diesel
hehehehe
>> what is the purpose of a color disc?
>
>Oh, please "learn me"!
color of diesel is mainlt to protect againts contamination
oxidation over time will break down olefinic HC
deisel may be dyed
however natural color is
yellow brown
by comparing a fixed layer againts a color disc
or by varing a the depth of oil in tube until it matches a fixed power
disc
>
Thomas H. Moats
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 11:22:27 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
> >news:dfmblu4nua3up452b...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 02:13:52 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> >> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Yes diesels are more efficient than gas, and can be more efficient
than
> >> >current are. Diesels do produce more of some types of harmful
emissions
> >than
> >> >gas.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> hehehe look you r link is 10 years old
>
> better get the facts
>
> you post babble
> now lets slam you
>
>
> http://www.dieselforum.org/factsheet/dieselemissions.html
>
>
posted a lot of my info from.
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Your ego must really be enormous. You have not shown me up. I've show
>exactly what I said. Diesels produce more NOX under load than gas engines.
>Prove me wrong if you can, back up what you say, you know you can't.
your ego that is
you owe me a BIG
IOU
outfoxed by a kid who cant spell
hehehe
time toRETIRE old man
your time of beiing of USE
is gone
I shall not waste my time with someone who cannot
do prper research
Given what we've learned, with dedicated efforts from manufacturers,
fuel suppliers, and ARB staff, we can expect near-zero emission diesel
within a decade...We're delighted that Californians will be the first
beneficiaries of the world's cleanest diesel technology. The U.S. EPA
must adopt a nationwide, low-sulfur diesel standard for this strategy
to be effective."
Dr. Alan C. Lloyd
Chairman, California Air Resources Board
October 6, 1999
Source: CARB press release urging a reduction in diesel pollution by
75%
Not only are green-diesel buses cleaner than or equal to natural gas
buses, but they are more cost-effective-a major consideration for
school districts strapped for funding. These new-low-sulfur-fuel
engines reduce particulate emissions by 90 percent, reduce NOx
(nitrogen oxide) by 25 percent over current diesel technology and
reduce hydrocarbon emissions to zero, which makes them competitive to
natural gas buses or even cleaner."
Bob Hattoy, Coalition for Books and Buses
"School Bus Officials Dispute Report on Diesel Exhaust Dangers"
School Transportation
http://www.dieselforum.org/quotes/quotes.html
moats .......get some training you UNLICENSED HACK
hurricane ast
red seal
IP
ford teck
master teck
Thomas H. Moats
engine is classed as a high speed diesel at 1000+ rpm ( meaning it runs at
1000 rpm and up, you know red line is at least 1000 RPM, could be 1500, or
even 5000. need I spell it out any clearer? )as I stated. It is an operating
range, stupid, reread my post.news:5tvclugcjvfbvij6a...@4ax.com...
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>news:rm0dlukvr5tnleqj0...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 11:22:27 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
>> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>> >news:dfmblu4nua3up452b...@4ax.com...
>> >> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 02:13:52 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
>> >> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Yes diesels are more efficient than gas, and can be more efficient
>than
>> >> >current are. Diesels do produce more of some types of harmful
>emissions
>> >than
>> >> >gas.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> hehehe look you r link is 10 years old
>>
>> better get the facts
>>
>> you post babble
>> now lets slam you
>>
>>
>> http://www.dieselforum.org/factsheet/dieselemissions.html
>>
>>
>Laughing, I was wandering if you would find that link. Where did you think I
>posted a lot of my info from.
you have posted no info
just bogus results
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>That's correct. Over the road trucks red line at 2500 to 3000. A diesel
>engine is classed as a high speed diesel at 1000+ rpm ( meaning it runs at
>1000 rpm and up, you know red line is at least 1000 RPM, could be 1500, or
>even 5000. need I spell it out any clearer? )as I stated. It is an operating
>range, stupid, reread my post.
NICE TRY
you fucked up
you owm me an IOU
you are caught in a lie
you also claimed that fuel used in high speed/low speed was the same
what is the flashpoint requirement for fuel on a low speed diesel
come on moats.....................
you are about to be hung again
doent that bug you larry?
a gkid who cant spell
sahows up an Old outdated wannabe?
hurricane ast
Thomas H. Moats
the bull. D-1 is cold climate fuel, D-2 is warm climate fuel. That is what
the flash point is all about, you wouldn't want to use a fuel refined for
warm climates in Alaska in winter now would you?
Seems you do not understand a smoke test from an emissions stand point. Tell
you what, get your CDL and take a trip in the states use a bob tail or pull
a tractor, don't matter, use kerosene, use #1 heating oil. When the DOT does
a spot check, and they do, lets see how you do when you try to explain why
your fuel color is wrong. Better yet, because of the improper lube qualities
of those oils, lets see if you do make it across the states with out an
injector or pump failure.
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
news:kj1dlu815gc2oii2f...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
Thomas H. Moats
diesels under load produce more nox and particle emissions than gas, that is
what the government is working to fix. A lot has been done, but more can and
will be. Zero emission? very questionable.news:0r2dlu0ion4o7igli...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>You are confusing grades of fuel, and trying to make it a speed rating, stop
>the bull. D-1 is cold climate fuel, D-2 is warm climate fuel. That is what
>the flash point is all about, you wouldn't want to use a fuel refined for
>warm climates in Alaska in winter now would you?
>
hehehe
cetane rating depicts temp
summer cetane 38-42
winter cetane 43-50
dont believe me
why do the do a specific gravity test
hehehehe
refer to my chart
as posted
d3 d4 d5 are lower grades
less cetane
sg .837= 50 cetane
.849= 46
.870= 38
what do you know
the more shit l...... the less cetane
BE LEARNED
hurricane ast
>Seems you do not understand a smoke test from an emissions stand point. Tell
>you what, get your CDL and take a trip in the states use a bob tail or pull
>a tractor, don't matter, use kerosene, use #1 heating oil. When the DOT does
>a spot check, and they do, lets see how you do when you try to explain why
>your fuel color is wrong. Better yet, because of the improper lube qualities
>of those oils, lets see if you do make it across the states with out an
>injector or pump failure.
hehehehe no laws required for diesel execpt for purple
as for grades
d1 d2 d3 d4
what the fuck do them diesel generators run
low speed diesel low grade fuel
Thomas H. Moats
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 16:30:10 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >You are confusing grades of fuel, and trying to make it a speed rating,
stop
> >the bull. D-1 is cold climate fuel, D-2 is warm climate fuel. That is
what
> >the flash point is all about, you wouldn't want to use a fuel refined for
> >warm climates in Alaska in winter now would you?
> >
>
>
> hehehe
>
>
> cetane rating depicts temp
>
> summer cetane 38-42
> winter cetane 43-50
>
> dont believe me
> why do the do a specific gravity test
> hehehehe
>
> refer to my chart
> as posted
> d3 d4 d5 are lower grades
> less cetane
Again, climate related.
>
> sg .837= 50 cetane
> .849= 46
>
> .870= 38
>
> what do you know
> the more shit l...... the less cetane
>
> BE LEARNED
>
> hurricane ast
>
>
> >Seems you do not understand a smoke test from an emissions stand point.
Tell
> >you what, get your CDL and take a trip in the states use a bob tail or
pull
> >a tractor, don't matter, use kerosene, use #1 heating oil. When the DOT
does
> >a spot check, and they do, lets see how you do when you try to explain
why
> >your fuel color is wrong. Better yet, because of the improper lube
qualities
> >of those oils, lets see if you do make it across the states with out an
> >injector or pump failure.
>
>
> hehehehe no laws required for diesel execpt for purple
>
Be learned.
http://fiss.com/rm/firm0025.htm
> as for grades
> d1 d2 d3 d4
> what the fuck do them diesel generators run
> low speed diesel low grade fuel
You are grabbing at straws.
Thomas H. Moats
"Thomas H. Moats" <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Mpw59.199458$nm.80...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Thomas H. Moats
DustyR...@mailcity.com
more Fords by far than Dodges, and your opinion is that of the
minority.
mike hunt
Roy wrote:
>
> Really?? You responded to my FIRST post to this thread, here's the second.
> My opinion is that Cummins makes a more reliable engine than Navistar. The
> sale of trucks have nothing to do with that. That isn't actually an opinion,
> sales prove it.
>
> Roy
> <Mike...@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:3D55845C...@mailcity.com...
> > We already know your opinion, you stated it in a previous post.
> > The fact that more people by Fords with diesels did change
> > however. If most people felt as you do they would be buying
> > Dodges, not Fords. So your opinion, although well intended,
> > is still that of a minority.
> >
> >
> > mike
> >
> >
> >
> > Roy wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm not going to debate with ya, just offer this. Cummins is used in
> more
> > > applications under adverse conditions than the navistar. Whether or not
> ford
> > > sells more trucks is really not relevant as to which is the better and
> more
> > > reliable engine. I'd be the first to go to a Chevy or ford if they had a
> > > Cummins in it. If something were to go wrong with my Cummins I can take
> it
> > > to a Cummins dealer where all they do is work on diesel's and nothing
> else.
> > > With the Navistar, if the tech that went to the familiarization class is
> on
> > > vacation you get the guy who just changed the horn on a Taurus. Thanks,
> but
> > > no thanks.
> > >
> > > Roy
> > > <Mike...@ylcos.com> wrote in message
> news:3D5423B0...@ylcos.com...
> > > > You certainly are entitled to your opinion, but is that of a
> > > > rather small minority. Ford sells a hell of a lot more V8
> > > > diesels than Dodge sell sixes and Fords quality rates far exceed
> > > > those of Dodge..
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > mike hunt
> > > >
> > > > Jacob Suter wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, but I want nothing to do with V-layout diesels. The idea
> behind
> > > a
> > > > > diesel is for the engine not to suck.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd take an I4 diesel over a V6 diesel any day.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then again, Longevity isn't job #1 at ford.
> > > > >
> > > > > JS
> > > > >
> > > > > <Mike...@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:3D53CEA0...@mailcity.com...
> > > > > > Ford has two new diesel engines coming on line in 2003, a V6 and
> > > > > > a smaller V8 that will be available in the F150 and Expedition
> > > > > > and Aviator. Navistar built a whole new plant to make the engine
> > > > > > exclusively for Ford. Ford owns a big piece of Cummins but uses
> > > > > > Navistar engines because the believe they are a better product.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > mike
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jacob Suter wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No, you'll be seeing cummins and hyundai diesels in D/C
> vehicles.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > the I4 3.9L turbo from cummins is a great workhorse. It'll hang
> > > with a
> > > > > 318
> > > > > > > while consuming just over half as much fuel, and much more
> low-end
> > > > > torque.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > They sell the dakota and durango with that engine in Mexico, and
> > > > > possibly
> > > > > > > the ram 1500, also.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'd love to see some competition in this department, and not
> > > > > pseudo-SUV's
> > > > > > > like the new VW "SUV" (station wagon with a lift kit) diesel -
> but a
> > > > > real,
> > > > > > > mid-size (Explorerish, the Durango is crap so it doesn't really
> > > count,
> > > > > maybe
> > > > > > > the TrailBlazer but, heh, GM... ok, the sequoia) SUV with a
> good
> > > diesel
> > > > > > > option.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Of course, the EPA (also known as the "Petrolium Profit
> Generation
> > > > > > > Association") wouldn't allow this, claiming emissions were too
> high,
> > > but
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > reality the petrol companies would cry since we'd suddenly only
> need
> > > > > > > low-grade (diesel doesn't require near the refinement as
> gasoline,
> > > for
> > > > > even
> > > > > > > the highest quality diesel) fuel in large quantities.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Then there is the whole bio-diesel issue - real good stuff if
> you
> > > ask
> > > > > me.
> > > > > > > Surplus and waste supplies turned into usable fuel. Then of
> course,
> > > you
> > > > > can
> > > > > > > run a limited mixture of used motor oil, which (depending on
> > > > > manufacturer
> > > > > > > suggestion) can add life to the fuel system, especially the
> boost
> > > pump.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > JS
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "sw" <urri...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:kfm6lug39c8hd5009...@4ax.com...
> > > > > > > > for what passes as progress. :(
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> I'm still waiting for little diesels to power the Dakotas,
> > > > > Durangos,
> > > > > > > > >Tahoes,
> > > > > > > > >> Explorers, etc......
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >I wouldn't think they could "give" these vehicles away if
> they
> > > were
> > > > > > > powered
> > > > > > > > >by your "little diesels" I certainly wouldn't want one.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > hehehehe
> > > > > > > > a diesel is more environmentally friendly
> > > > > > > > dont be surprised
> > > > > > > > escpecially since daimler chrysler
> > > > > > > > you may see them
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > hurricane ast
Roy
Roy
<DustyR...@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:3D56CE28...@mailcity.com...
Denny
Denny
"Roy" <R...@home.net> wrote in message
news:UvA59.92048$uj.5...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
dw
<tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>news:baedlu0skih4aatc8...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 16:30:10 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
>> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >You are confusing grades of fuel, and trying to make it a speed rating,
>stop
>> >the bull. D-1 is cold climate fuel, D-2 is warm climate fuel. That is
>what
>> >the flash point is all about, you wouldn't want to use a fuel refined for
>> >warm climates in Alaska in winter now would you?
>> >
>>
>>
>> hehehe
>>
>>
>> cetane rating depicts temp
>>
>> summer cetane 38-42
>> winter cetane 43-50
>>
>> dont believe me
>> why do the do a specific gravity test
>> hehehehe
>>
>And has nothing to do with engine speed, point proven.
>
dont believe me
you still dont
lie I said purple her is the tax grab
>> as for grades
>> d1 d2 d3 d4
>> what the fuck do them diesel generators run
>> low speed diesel low grade fuel
>You are grabbing at straws.
>
you are the one cought in a lie
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
>> >news:kj1dlu815gc2oii2f...@4ax.com...
>> >> >> >> the the chart and numbers PREV POSTED
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >Wow! I claimed you made up numbers after you posted this and before
>I
>> >> >read
>> >> >> >it................
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> please post how one would do a smoke test?
>> >> >
>> >> >Called a "snap test" Snap Acceleration Test, SAE J1667, using opacity
>> >> >measurement.
>> >> >
>> >> heheh
>> >> FAIL
>> >> smoke test
>> >>
>> >> 20 ml sample..wick is placed in, and ignited so flame is 1 cm high
>> >> flame lowered until smoke dissapears
>> >>
>> >> height of flame indicates smoke point
>> >> hehehe
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >> Please tell me the color of diesel for high speed diesel
>> >> >> please tell me the color of diesel for medium speed diesel
>> >> >> please tell me the color of diesel for slow speed diesell
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Red-Low-sulfur, no tax Clear-Low-sulfur, taxed Blue-High-sulfur, no
>tax
thats d1 d2 for high speed /medium speed diesel
only
>> >> >
>> >> >Application Color of Fuel
>> >> >Farm Equipment Generally, red or blue; but may use clear and apply for
>> >tax
>> >> >refund.
>> >> >Off-highway Equipment Same as above.
>> >> >Private Cars, Trucks Clear. Trucks with refrigeration units may use
>blue
>> >or
>> >> >clear for refrigeration, and buyer must apply the tax
>> >> >Buses Red
>> >> >Government Cars,Trucks Red
>> >> >Boats Clear
>> >> >Commercial Blue
>> >> >
>> >> >Has nothing to do with diesel engine speed, only use.
has to do with tax and not engine use
>> >> >
hehehehbe
.all applications you posted are medium speed and high speed diesel
all require ds1 or d2
do some research on slow speed diesel
its pretty hard to dye you black oil blue
hehehehehehehehehjeh
hurricane ast
Thomas H. Moats
your own shit?
"Thomas H. Moats" <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Zuz59.200474$nm.81...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Thomas H. Moats
you get from a paint store?
"Thomas H. Moats" <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Riu59.198578$nm.79...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Thomas H. Moats
caught. "collage" was tough huh?news:8ukdlu8lmi6qusa40...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
They make pumps and injectors for the diesel industry. The Navistar 6.3, 7.3
used there pumps and injectors. So do a lot of other diesel engine
manufactures. Would a company as large as Stanadyne put out information like
that if it was a lie? You have nothing to back up what you say, time to give
it up.news:8ukdlu8lmi6qusa40...@4ax.com...
Thomas H. Moats
at least the smallest amount that you have good information.
http://fiss.com/rm/firm0025.htm
Read it again. Big company, no lie.
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
news:8ukdlu8lmi6qusa40...@4ax.com...
Roy
Roy
"Denny" <wdd...@woh.rr.com> wrote in message
news:rNA59.263167$CJ2.33...@twister.neo.rr.com...
Roy
Roy
<DustyR...@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:3D56CE28...@mailcity.com...
Thomas H. Moats
http://www.tdiclub.com/TDIFAQ/TDiFAQ-3.html#a
Winterized -Diesel fuel number 2 loses its ability to flow at temperatures
below 20F (-7C.). This is caused by wax separation, and is commonly termed
"gelling". The thicker wax component of the fuel may be blocked by the fuel
filter although it can flow through the larger diameter fuel lines. The fuel
filter in the Volkswagen TDi is heated to reduce this tendency. The heater
permits the use of Diesel fuel number 2 down to a temperature of -10F
(-24C). Most fuel companies "winterize" the fuel sold during winter months
in cold climates. This winterized fuel resists gelling at low temperatures.
The winterized fuel does not provide the same level of performance as the
summer fuel, so your mileage will likely drop while using it. Be aware that
the refueling range of the TDi may permit travel from a warm climate to an
extremely cold one on one tank of fuel. It is recommended to fill up with
winterized fuel before stopping the engine for a long time in a cold
environment.
Remember what I said about D-2 being a warm climate fuel?
"Thomas H. Moats" <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GcB59.25420$Ce.13...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Thomas H. Moats
http://members.iinet.net.au/~mbuckler/fuel/index.shtml#diesel
Some Notes on Diesel Fuel
<awadd...@acorn.co.uk.fuel> writes.......(Dec 1993)
Don't forget that some multifuel stoves will run on Diesel, which has the
advantage of a very high calorific value per unit mass. In UK, this is
"Diesel" or "DERV", the latter for road vehicles specifically. Its also
possible to get hold of agricultural or "Red Diesel", which is free of
excise duty, but under no circumstances should you use it in a road vehicle
! In Spain, diesel is "Gazoleo A".
Editors note: The name "diesel" is used in Australia, Belgium, Denmark,
Germany, Holland, Israel, Sweden, Switzerland, USA and the UK,
Japan - Keiyu.
Italy- Gasolio per autotrazione.
France - Gas oil.
Ya know, I keep looking, but do not see purple. Grape juice must not be
considered diesel fuel.
"Thomas H. Moats" <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GcB59.25420$Ce.13...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Backyard Mechanic
Lemme get this straight.. tell me again;
Is that Beavis or Butthead?
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote
Backyard Mechanic
somewhere;
Seems as though I read them all before, though.. something like 23 years ago
at GM's last great (the 6 liter) diesel experiment.
When they get rid of the clatter... not just on the showroom floor, but at
100,000 miles; THEN I'll think about a diesel.
For a diesel to be smooth, I guess it'd have to be a v10
Remember when a lot of Suburbans were sold with diesels? My brother had
one.. he loved it but finally gave up on it because of the noise
"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
news:e81dlu8trt4hbrfgv...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 11:22:27 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dw" <ric...@ezzzzzzzpost.com> wrote in message
> >news:dfmblu4nua3up452b...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 02:13:52 GMT, "Thomas H. Moats"
> >> <tmo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Yes diesels are more efficient than gas, and can be more efficient
than
> >> >current are. Diesels do produce more of some types of harmful
emissions
> >than
> >> >gas.
> >> >
>
> heheheh
>
> hey moats when you do RESEARCH
> use new text books
> HEHEHEHE
>
>
> QUOTES...
> WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT DIESEL
>
> "Diesel engines are all the rage in the car game at present and no
> right thinking automaker can be without one."
> Essex Chronicle (UK)
> (June 27, 2002)
>
> "The diesel boom goes on, with a huge move towards diesel sales in the
> UK in the last 18 months."
> UK Newsquest
> (June 23, 2002)
>
> "Millions of motorists are waking up to the wonders of diesel."
> Graeme Lennox and Avril Cadden
> Scottish Sunday Mail
> (June 23, 2002)
>
> "You will cut the cost of motoring if you join the diesel revolution."
> Graeme Lennox and Avril Cadden
> Scottish Sunday Mail
> (June 23, 2002)
>
> "Gone are the days of the smoke-spewing hulks that droned up and down
> our highways."
> Graeme Lennox and Avril Cadden
> Scottish Sunday Mail
> (June 23, 2002)
>
> "Today's diesels are quieter, cleaner, nippier and more enjoyable to
> drive than the clunky engines of 10 years ago."
> Irish News
> (June 19, 2002)
>
> "All in all, this move to diesel looks quite promising-everyone's
> optimistic, Houston's on its way to having much cleaner air..."
> Austin American Statesman
> (June 17, 2002)
>
> "If diesel accounted for only 30 percent of California's fleet of
> motor vehicles, estimates are that fuel consumed by vehicles in
> California could be cut in half"
> Rep. John D. Dingell (D-MI) in his June 6 address to the Subcommittee
> on Oversight and Investigations
> (June 6, 2002)
>
> "Diesel is the way of the future, and I am hopeful that it's
> short-term benefits will not be overlooked by the Administration or
> the Congress, even as we examine longer term strategies."
> Rep. John D. Dingell (D-MI) in his June 6 address to the Subcommittee
> on Oversight and Investigations
> (June 6, 2002)
>
> "It's more a question of can you afford not to do it."
> Harris County (TX) Judge Robert Eckels, on the cost of convertingg
> Houston's Department of Transportation fleet to clean diesel to
> improve air quality
> as quoted in the Associated Press
>
> "In Europe, car makers have agreed to lower their carbon dioxide
> emissions and the biggest building block for that is diesel - I don't
> see that changing."
> JD Power analyst Al Bedwell
> as quoted in Planet Ark (May 31, 2002)
>
> "When drivers in North America think of diesel, they still think of
> loud trucks belching black smoke, but today's diesels are leaner,
> cleaner and quieter."
> Dave Szczupak, Navistar International
> as quoted in the Associated Press (May 29, 2002)
>
> "Diesels have come a long way in a short time."
> Macarthur Chronicle (Australia) (May 28, 2002)
>
> "The advancement of diesel engines, in power, smoothness, fuel economy
> and emissions has been strong over the past year or so and unless a
> manufacturer has a new-generation diesel, they'll be left behind."
> Stuart Innes
> The Advertiser (Australia) (May 25, 2002)
>
> "People barely notice the difference between diesel and petrol these
> days."
> Luke Bosdet, AA of the UK
> Daily Star (May 10, 2002)
>
> "In these days of high fuel prices, can there be better justification
> for switching to diesel?"
> "Forget Everything You Ever Heard: Diesel isn't Dull"
> The Irish Times (May 8, 2002)
>
> "The new-wave (diesel fuel injection) process results in passenger
> cars that are as quick and quiet as their petroleum -fuelled
> counterparts, but with astonishing fuel economy."
> "New Diesels Do It Better"
> Perth Sunday Times (May 5, 2002)
>
> "Technology beat the clatter and smoke of diesel car engines. It's
> time for a U.S. comeback."
> Michelle Krebs
> Popular Science (April 2002)
>
> "In the past decade, diesel technology has revved ahead."
> Michelle Krebs
> Popular Science (April 2002)
>
> "I think the best alternative fuels is one we already have, but this
> country doesn't want to produce: No. 1 refined diesel fuel."
> Jay Leno, "Driving Fuelishly"
> Popular Mechanics (April 2002)
>
> "Just as heavy-duty truck buyers already favor diesels for economic
> and utility reasons, consumers might make the same decisions if
> diesels were more widely available in smaller vehicles."
> David Dwight of HyperCar (an affiliate of the Rocky Mountain
> Institute)
> Fort Worth Star Telegram (April 28, 2002)
>
> "Without fanfare a new class of vehicle is on the rise - the
> high-performance diesel."
> Andrew Frankel
> Sunday Times of London (April 28, 2002)
>
> "However oxymoronic it may sound, the high performance diesel is not
> simply here to stay, it will in time assume as great a presence on
> (UK) roads as its petrol powered equivalents."
> Andrew Frankel
> Sunday Times of London (April 28, 2002)
>
> "Clean diesel seems to be the right choice."
> Dana Kauffman, WMATA Board member
> Washington Times (April 24, 2002)
>
> "Suddenly there does appear to be a lot of proponents for diesel
> engines."
> Automotive News (April 22, 2002)
>
> "With gasoline prices as they are and diesel technology forging ahead,
> as it should have years ago...sales of the humble oil burner are
> taking off as never before."
> Phil Bailey
> The Montreal Gazette (April 12, 2002)
>
> "Our political leaders have chose to ignore a much simpler and more
> immediately available solution (to reduce the U.S. demand for foreign
> oil): diesel fuel."
> James K. Hammitt and David Ropeik
> The Sacramento Bee (April 7, 2002)
>
> "(Sen. John Kerry,) it's time for you and your supporters to end your
> knee-jerk opposition to all things diesel."
> Warren Brown
> Washington Post (March 18, 2002)
>
> "Dramatic improvements in fuel efficiency could be achieved if
> Washington allowed automakers to market diesel-powered vehicles."
> "Gas And Gasbags... Or, The Open Road And Its Enemies"
> National Review (March 25, 2002)
>
> "Today's automobile diesel engine.is a high-tech juggernaut, markedly
> more sophisticated than the gasoline engine."
> Bill Visnic
> "Improved Diesel Engines Sell in Europe, Not Here; The New Breed is
> Quieter, Cleaner, More Powerful"
> The Plain Dealer (March 7, 2002)
>
> "(This) new breed of diesels combine a blend of refinement,
> performance, and economy that has to be experienced to be believed."
> Phil Llewellin
> "Not Such an Old Diesel Burner"
> The Scotsman (March 6, 2002)
>
> "Fuel-efficient diesel-powered cars and trucks, in fact, are
> everywhere (in London); and they're not spewing smoky particulate
> matter, or creating noise pollution with engine clatter."
> Warren Brown
> "London a lesson in fuel saving: Brits accept idea they can't gobble
> up resources for a song"
> Edmonton Journal (February 26, 2002)
>
> "Diesels are far cleaner today than the old black-smoke spewing models
> of 30 years ago. Today's models emit 63 percent less nitrogen oxides
> (NOx) and 83 percent less soot than in the early 1970s. Diesel engines
> can currently match gasoline powered cars in all emission categories
> except NOx."
> "Diesel, Clean Coal Energy Equal Energy Independence"
> Detroit News (February 17, 2002)
>
> "Diesel is the simplest way to accomplish dramatic gains in fuel
> efficiency without changing the way America makes or markets vehicles,
> and without requiring a new fuel distribution system. Embracing clean
> coal and clean diesel as the fuels of the near future is the best way
> to cut petroleum consumption without stifling the economy."
> "Diesel, Clean Coal Energy Equal Energy Independence"
> Detroit News (February 17, 2002)
>
> "Modern diesel engines really are very clean. The old view was that
> they emit more nitrous oxides than petrol engines, and chuck out sooty
> particulates which are seen as another threat. The truth is that
> today's diesel engines have a particulates trap which (they claim)
> almost eliminates emissions. The modern diesel engine is cleaner in
> every other respect and produces significantly less carbon dioxide,
> justifying a lower tax demand."
> "Tax and the Pollution Confusion"
> UK Newsquest Regional Press-This is Wiltshire (February 10, 2002)
>
> "...Because diesel gets much better mileage, it could become the
> favored internal-combustion system in gas-guzzling sport utility
> vehicles."
> Ben Dobbin
> "Diesel Motors to Get a Makeover"
> Associated Press (February 3, 2002)
>
> "Virtually everything you did this morning -- the cereal and milk you
> had for breakfast, clothes you decided to wear, the car you drove to
> work and even how you sent your kids off to school -- involved a
> diesel-powered truck or bus. A truck has at some point shipped most
> consumer goods in the US, while buses remain critical to transporting
> students to and from school."
> John S. Hawkins, President of Cloud 9 Shuttle Inc.
> "Alternative Fuels and The Marketplace"
> The San Diego Union-Tribune (November 20, 2001)
>
> "The latest generation of light-duty diesel engines offers healthy
> performance, quiet operation and mileage rates that are upwards of 60
> per cent better than equivalent gasoline engines."
> Tim Lougheed, Writer
> "Clean, Green...Diesel?: North Americans Tend to Shun Diesel-Powered
> Cars. But Technology May Be About to Change that Attitude"
> The Ottawa Citizen (November 16, 2001)
>
> "The latest diesel cars on offer are all brilliant pieces of
> technology. They're no longer slow -- some of them produce more torque
> and horsepower than the petrol version, and gradually they have become
> the preferred choice for those who are prepared to ignore the old
> image of diesels and find out the truth for themselves."
> "Taxing Time for Choosing Your Next Car"
> UK Newsquest Regional Press (July 25, 2001)
>
> "Diesels will make a big comeback in the United States in the second
> half of this decade... Advances in diesel technologies, such as the
> common-rail injection systems that make a diesel engine run quieter,
> reduce emissions and improve fuel economy, will help U.S. consumers to
> accept diesels in light trucks and cars...Virtually every major
> vehicle manufacturer is looking at bringing diesel back to the U.S.,
> or bringing it for the first time. It is a huge trend."
> Thad Males, Director of Alternative Power Technologies at J.D. Power
> and Associates, California
> "VW Diesel Inventory Wiped Out"
> Automotive News (July 23, 2001)
>
> "These and other steps that can be continued and improved will allow
> the use of the diesel engine, with its superior fuel consumption, to
> continue to benefit society while greatly reducing its negative
> environmental and health impacts. The next 10 years can become the
> decade of the clean diesel."
> Alan Lloyd, Chairman of the California Air Resources Board
> "Decade of the Clean Diesel Coming, State Air Regulator Tells Orlando
> Meeting"
> BNA Daily (July 2001)
>
> "It's hard to judge, but if the industry can resolve such image,
> regulatory and other issues, there is a "significant chance" that
> diesel-powered vehicles may account for "more than 10%" of annual U.S.
> demand for cars and light trucks over the next decade."
> Gerhard Schmidt, Ford Motor Co.'s new Research Chief
> "Ford Research Head: Diesel Could Grab 10% of U.S. Market"
> Wall Street Journal (June 5, 2001)
>
> "Diesel fuel injector systems are the rage in Europe, with 40 percent
> of new car registrations being passenger vehicles with diesel
> engines."
> Kurt Liedtke, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Robert Bosch
> Corp./North American operations
> "Charleston, S.C., Plant is World's Largest Manufacturer of Fuel
> Injectors"
> The Post and Courier (Charleston, S.C.) (June 2, 2001)
>
> "Most of the world is diesel friendly. The current EPA regulations
> make it very difficult to use diesel technology."
> Harry Pearce, GM Vice-Chairman
> "More Focus on Diesel..."
> Sacramento Bee (June 1, 2001)
>
> "Diesels are trendy. The customers for diesels are younger and more
> affluent, and those are the people who are trendsetters."
> Thierry Dombreval, Senior Vice President for Marketing at Renault
> "It Gets 78 Miles a Gallon, but U.S. Snubs Diesel"
> The New York Times (May 27, 2001)
>
> "I believe it is just a matter of time before the United States comes
> around to diesel. The technology has moved ahead so much. Fifty miles
> to the gallon is normal, and you don't even know you are driving a
> diesel."
> David W. Thursfield, Chief Executive of Ford of Europe
> "It Gets 78 Miles a Gallon, but U.S. Snubs Diesel"
> The New York Times (May 27, 2001)
>
> "A liter of diesel takes one farther and produces fewer greenhouse
> gases. The big problem with diesel is the small particulates, but we
> think that problem can be solved with new particulate filters."
> Albrecht Schmidt, top expert on energy issues for Germany's Green
> Party
> "It Gets 78 Miles a Gallon, but U.S. Snubs Diesel"
> The New York Times (May 27, 2001)
>
> "When President George W. Bush unveiled his energy policy, no mention
> was made of diesel technology, the lone automotive alternative that
> could dramatically curb oil consumption without billions of dollars in
> taxpayer subsidies."
> Editorial, "Expanding Energy Sources: Diesel..."
> The Detroit News (May 27, 2001)
>
> "Diesel-fueled vehicles get 45 to 60 percent better fuel economy than
> their gasoline-powered counterparts. Using diesel-powered cars can
> save consumers hundreds of dollars yearly."
> Editorial, "Expanding Energy Sources: Diesel..."
> The Detroit News (May 27, 2001)
>
> "Diesel engines convert fuel to power more efficiently, last longer,
> produce more torque and are easier to maintain than their gasoline
> counterparts. Historically, diesel fuel also has been cheaper than
> gasoline. That's why they are the power plant of choice for 94 percent
> of North America's truckers."
> Paul McKay, Journalist
> "Big Trucks, Big Pollution"
> The Vancouver Sun (May 23, 2001)
>
> "Saying no - to diesel engines, nuclear power, energy exploration and
> more sport-utility vehicles - isn't an answer. It's a cop out."
> Daniel Howes, Automotive Writer
> "Diesel Engines Could Help U.S. Beat Fuel Crunch if Feds Wake Up"
> The Detroit News (May 22, 2001)
>
> "At the quality end, the cars are just as quick, you do not have to
> fill up as often as with a petrol engine, and they are not as noisy as
> they used to be. Although diesel is subject to a 3% supplement it is
> still cheaper than petrol. This generation of diesel cars is great."
> Andrew Cope
> Managing Director of Zenith Vehicle Contracts
> Financial Director (May 2001)
>
> "Even where the price of diesel and petrol is equal, the sheer quality
> of diesel engines is making it the engine of choice because it's a
> nicer engine. It's now seen as the intelligent choice."
> Charles Moss
> JD Power-LMC (UK)
> "Carmakers Clamor for Diesel, Leave Smelly Image in Dust"
> Dow Jones International News - Chicago Sun Times (April 19, 2001)
>
> "Not only are green-diesel buses cleaner than or equal to natural gas
> buses, but they are more cost-effective-a major consideration for
> school districts strapped for funding. These new-low-sulfur-fuel
> engines reduce particulate emissions by 90 percent, reduce NOx
> (nitrogen oxide) by 25 percent over current diesel technology and
> reduce hydrocarbon emissions to zero, which makes them competitive to
> natural gas buses or even cleaner."
> Bob Hattoy, Coalition for Books and Buses
> "School Bus Officials Dispute Report on Diesel Exhaust Dangers"
> School Transportation News (April 2001)
>
> "In the U.S., people still think diesel engines are slow, loud and
> dirty. But now, (a diesel engine) has everything you can expect from a
> BMW model. It's sporty and cultivated. And it's more fuel efficient."
> Wieland Bruch, BMW spokesman
> "BMW Mulls Fresh Crack At Diesel in U.S., Fuel Price Key"
> Dow Jones International News (April 19, 2001)
>
> "BMW's diesel engine is arguably better than a petrol engine. You
> begin to say, why aren't we all using diesels?"
> Chris Will, Auto Analyst at Lehman Brothers (London)
> "BMW Mulls Fresh Crack At Diesel in U.S., Fuel Price Key"
> Dow Jones International News (April 19, 2001)
>
> "Recent technology has made diesel engines more environmentally sound
> and the barrier is a psychological one more than a rational one."
> Charles Moss
> JD Power-LMC (UK)
> "BMW Mulls Fresh Crack At Diesel in U.S., Fuel Price Key"
> Dow Jones International News (April 19, 2001)
>
> "Diesel fuel contains more power per unit than gasoline, compressed
> natural gas, or liquefied natural gas. Diesel engines, depending on
> models compared, use 30 percent to 60 percent less fuel than gasoline
> engines. Diesel-electric hybrid vehicles, large and small, generally
> get better mileage than gasoline-electric hybrids."
> Warren Brown, Writer
> "Energy Crisis Could Have its Benefits"
> The Washington Post (March 30, 2001)
>
> "Diesel is the lifeblood of commerce in this nation...When you start
> tinkering with diesel and its costs, you are going to have an
> automatic ripple effect in all segments of the economy. The use of
> diesel is pervasive."
> Jay McKeeman, Executive Vice President
> California Independent Oil Marketers Association
> The New York Times (March 1, 2001)
>
> "A diesel unit is considerably more expensive, but fuel cost is
> generally a few cents per litre lower and fuel economy is considerably
> better than that delivered by gas engines. Diesel engines are
> incredibly durable and need less routine maintenance since tuneups and
> spark plug changes aren't needed."
> Harry Pegg, Journalist
> "Fuel For Thought"
> The Calgary Sun (March 1, 2001)
>
> "Diesel engines produced today are virtually smokeless and are 90 -
> 95% cleaner than their counterparts of the 1970's. This means that for
> the same amount of emissions, we can now operate 10 modern school or
> inner city buses for each single 1970's bus in operation. The
> technical breakthroughs of the past few years have gradually increased
> the sociability of diesel engines, another important, yet often
> unspoken modern requirement."
> Dr. Rodica Baranescu
> President of SAE International
> Chief Engineer of Engine Technology for International Truck and Engine
> Co.
> SAE Off-Highway Engineering (February, 2001)
>
> "We believe that in the next six or seven years we are going to see a
> big penetration of diesel cars and SUV's, because of CAFÉ (fuel
> economy standards) and other reasons."
> Marge Oge
> Director of the EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality
> Automotive News (January 1, 2001)
>
> "The diesel is a fairly marvelous invention."
> Professor William H. Sutton
> School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
> University of Oklahoma
>
> "Indeed, diesels have become so clean and efficient that they may even
> help propel the next generation of non-gas vehicles."
> Michael Arndt
> Business Week (November 13, 2000)
>
> "Modern diesel engines have come of age. It was the diesel powered,
> Lupo, not a hybrid car, that won the "100 kilometers on 3 litres of
> fuel" competition. That a diesel was the first vehicle (clean burning
> to boot) to fulfill this challenge from European environmentalists,
> and not a hybrid, says it all."
> Ed Ring, Journalist
> "Green Diesels"
> Ecoworld (November 2000)
>
> "New diesels are quicker, quieter, cleaner and fuel efficient. So why
> ban them?"
> Mark Yost, Journalist
> "Engine of Change"
> Smart Money (July 2000)
>
> "Besides being fuel-efficient, today's diesels are 90 percent cleaner
> than models from 10 years ago. The reason is technology. The new
> direct-injection diesels-which account for over 60 percent of new-car
> sales in Europe-operate at higher internal pressures, resulting in
> more efficient combustion."
> Mark Yost, Journalist
> "Engine of Change"
> Smart Money (July 2000)
>
> "In Europe, diesels already have about a third of the overall market,
> and the percentage is rising. A recent report suggested it would reach
> 40%. Already in France, the Benelux countries and Austria, more than
> half the cars use diesels. Why? They use less fuel."
> William Diem, Auto Stocks Columnist
> Worldyinvestor.com (July 7, 2000)
>
> "Diesel fuel is the lifeblood of California's economy...California's
> transportation infrastructure is sustained entirely by the
> availability of diesel fuel. Every major industry...agriculture,
> manufacturing, timber, retailing, student and public transportation,
> emergency services, raw materials movement...depends on diesel fuel."
> Joel D. Anderson
> Executive Vice President
> California Trucking Association
> March 30, 1999
> Source: Letter to Gov. Gray Davis in opposition to CARB's
> California-Only Fuel Standard
>
> "Given what we've learned, with dedicated efforts from manufacturers,
> fuel suppliers, and ARB staff, we can expect near-zero emission diesel
> within a decade...We're delighted that Californians will be the first
> beneficiaries of the world's cleanest diesel technology. The U.S. EPA
> must adopt a nationwide, low-sulfur diesel standard for this strategy
> to be effective."
> Dr. Alan C. Lloyd
> Chairman, California Air Resources Board
> October 6, 1999
> Source: CARB press release urging a reduction in diesel pollution by
> 75%
>
>
>
>
>
>
> '
Thomas H. Moats
diesel fuel really are for ( all four of them, five if you consider one
other ). Hint, for most part has nothing to do with speed of the engine. Oh,
while you are at it, what are the other methods of "cracking" in the
distillation process are there and how many.news:fk3dluonrcgrcj9eh...@4ax.com...