Mahindra Diesel Pickups Comming to America!

[Belmont31R]

Its funny you go outside our borders, and nearly every utilitarian vehicle is diesel. But here, thanks to the EPA, we cannot have them...

[Mjolnir]

Navistar and Ford had a 4.5L V-6 Turbo Diesel ready to go at the same time as the 6.0L Navistar in 2003. Navistar built a new plant for the V-6, but Ford backed out and paid a large settlement.

Ford claimed it didn't meet their requirements, but the "story" was that Ford marketing killed it because they figured it would siphon off higher margin sales of the 250/350 with the V-8 Powerstroke. When 70% of every 250/350 was getting a diesel, people appeared to be willing to pay the upcharge for the Super Duty truck AND the engine meaning more profits. Also, the F-150 would have needed some beefing up of the front end to support the weight of the diesel - so it would have been more like an "F-175".

At this point, diesels just don't make economic sense unless you NEED the torque. The addition of aftertreatment filters, EGR, and other emissions controls has driven up the cost and reduced fuel economy. Couple that with diesel fuel prices that are now equal to or higher than gas instead of cheaper as they were a few years ago and earlier and it's a no-win situation. The extra cost of the engine is never paid back by the fuel savings. There is a durability argument, but the higher level of technology and complexity in new diesels means more things that can go wrong.

Remember that Europe does not currently require aftertreatment filtration on passenger cars - they went straight to SCR injection so they haven't seen some of the cost increases yet.

That is changing with the Tier4i industrial engines requirements in Europe, US/Canada, and Japan. Starting in 2011, off-road diesels in all of these markets are phasing in aftertreatment filters and EGR just like the 2007 and later on-road engines in the US. The phase-in schedule depends on the hp rating of the engine.

While Biodiesel is laudable, it offers no economic advantage and thus will not drive the market the change unless it become a regulatory requirement.

There were some remarkable heated discussions with the Navistar team. I know because I was present at several... Not sure of your claims of Marketing erosion but they are believable.

The aftertreatment systems could have been avoided had the Big Three (plus Toyota, Honda, etc) could have contested the Gov't and they chose not to. Ford chose to show that they could meet the 3x mpg with Hydrogen Hybrid Technology. I'm not sure if GM and DCX chose the same strategy. Either way, it was a heavily flawed strategy: show them that we can meet your criteria but look at the high cost associated with it. Mistake.

Biodiesel makes little sense. One does not remove human FOODSTUFFS for powering vehicles. I wouldn't anyway...

[Armati]

Biodiesel makes little sense. One does not remove human FOODSTUFFS for powering vehicles. I wouldn't anyway...

Unlike ethanol that does take food out of supply, FAME uses only the soybean oil. And, in you can use something we have in abundance in America - old fry oil!

Again, the idea is to only start with B2 and gradually phase in more FAME into the mix in order to give the market a chance to catch up.

[kmrtnsn]

It makes much better commercial sense for fry oil and other waste oils to be collected and burned on a larger scale, such as in large fuel fired boilers and incinerators than in onesy-twosey vehicles. Be careful with your french fry fueled Volvos in some states; you are required to pay state fuel/road taxes on every gallon pumped into the fry-mobile, someday, someone is going to papertape your fuel tank and the right color better come out.

[EzGoingKev]

frankly I don't see the attraction to them I once did.

At one time diesel was good but things have changed.

Diesel has gone up in price.

Back in the day domestic cars had MPFI systems while the trucks retained the shower head TBI that sucked down more gas if you let it idle than it did if you drove it. The mileage disparity was large. Now the trucks have MPFI systems too and much better electronics, just like the cars and their fuel mileage has greatly improved and the disparity between gas and diesel is jut not as large anymore.

You now pay anywhere from $7k to $10k additional for the diesel which means you are financing more, paying a higher sales tax, paying more for insurance etc.

With the not so large differences in fuel pricing and mileage it seems to me that it would take quite a while to recoup all the extra money you had to shell out to eat at the diesel table.

[Left Sig]

There were some remarkable heated discussions with the Navistar team. I know because I was present at several... Not sure of your claims of Marketing erosion but they are believable.

The aftertreatment systems could have been avoided had the Big Three (plus Toyota, Honda, etc) could have contested the Gov't and they chose not to. Ford chose to show that they could meet the 3x mpg with Hydrogen Hybrid Technology. I'm not sure if GM and DCX chose the same strategy. Either way, it was a heavily flawed strategy: show them that we can meet your criteria but look at the high cost associated with it. Mistake.

Biodiesel makes little sense. One does not remove human FOODSTUFFS for powering vehicles. I wouldn't anyway...

That was the story- I'm not sure whether it was true or not but like you said it does make some sense. Ford's official line is the engine didn't meet their requirements, but if that was true the contract provisions should have allowed them to walk away without paying that big settlement.

But had Ford gone ahead with the V-6 and worked through the issues, they would have been cleaning up the market for the past few years after the diesel prices went up. Shortsightedness is a Ford trademark, as I'm sure you know having worked there.

The big question now is whether or not Ford's new home grown (with help from Europe) diesel engine will be any good or not. It might perform well, but the first year reliability is something I would be very wary of. I've seen too many Ford in-sourcing efforts that became total trainwrecks because Ford management thought they were smarter than everyone else and did stuff the technical experts warned them not to do. Then it takes a couple years to work out the bugs.

I think it would have taken a lot more than the diesel pickup companies to challenge the EPA. The big diesel commercial engine companies like Cat, Cummins, Navistar, etc. would need to have been involved as well. Now the 2007 on-road diesel emissions regulations start to hit off-road industrial engines next year in the US, Canada, Europe, and Japan. There's no getting away from it now.

[ranburr]

At one time diesel was good but things have changed.

Diesel has gone up in price.

Back in the day domestic cars had MPFI systems while the trucks retained the shower head TBI that sucked down more gas if you let it idle than it did if you drove it. The mileage disparity was large. Now the trucks have MPFI systems too and much better electronics, just like the cars and their fuel mileage has greatly improved and the disparity between gas and diesel is jut not as large anymore.

You now pay anywhere from $7k to $10k additional for the diesel which means you are financing more, paying a higher sales tax, paying more for insurance etc.

With the not so large differences in fuel pricing and mileage it seems to me that it would take quite a while to recoup all the extra money you had to shell out to eat at the diesel table.

Not quite sure where you get your info. But, a diesal upgrade is about $3k at any dealer. Mileage may be closer around town driving; but the diesal holds a huge advantage in towing capabilities, including mileage. The real advantage of the diesal is the lifespan. My 99 Ford Super Duty F250 has 350K miles on it and has never been in the shop. I know numerous diesal owners with the same story. I know one gas engine owner who has over 300k on his truck and it is suprisingly a Dodge. Bottom line, if you hold onto your vehicles, diesal is a clear winner. If you get a new car every couple of yrs, stick with gas.

[Nathan_Bell]

Not quite sure where you get your info. But, a diesal upgrade is about $3k at any dealer. Mileage may be closer around town driving; but the diesal holds a huge advantage in towing capabilities, including mileage. The real advantage of the diesal is the lifespan. My 99 Ford Super Duty F250 has 350K miles on it and has never been in the shop. I know numerous diesal owners with the same story. I know one gas engine owner who has over 300k on his truck and it is suprisingly a Dodge. Bottom line, if you hold onto your vehicles, diesal is a clear winner. If you get a new car every couple of yrs, stick with gas.

Your information is about ten years out of date for that price. See attached window sticker photo for a 2011 SD Ford. Even that upgrade cost is shuffling of numbers, as a replacement DPF is almost $4000.

[EzGoingKev]

Not quite sure where you get your info. But, a diesal upgrade is about $3k at any dealer.

Firstly, its D-E-A-R, not D-E-R-E and Sarah aint got two R's.

Dodge's "Build My Own" has the 6.7l Cummins listed as a $7,615 option for their 2500 series.

On Ford's "Build & Price" has their 6.7l Power Stroke listed as a $7835 option on the F-350.

Chevrolet's site blows compared to the others and could not find a diesel option but the Duramax engines are up there with the rest of them.

If the dealer has something on the lot they want to get rid of they obviously discount them, but if you have to order something new then those prices are the starting prices of that option.

Mileage may be closer around town driving; but the diesal holds a huge advantage in towing capabilities, including mileage.

It all depends on what you are towing (weight) and how you drive.

My grandfather tows a little trailer down to his other house on Cape Cod a few times a year to bring his wood chipper and stuff down there. He isn't going to notice anything.

When I worked with the race team we towed a huge custom built trailer with the bikes, pit bikes, tools, spares, fuel, tires, etc all around the country. There you would notice the difference.

It is more common to see guys that spend all the extra money for a diesel truck because they "need" it for towing. They own a motor home that they pull a 100 miles away once a year. At least that is what you see up here in the NE.

[rob_s]

It is more common to see guys that spend all the extra money for a diesel truck because they "need" it for towing. They own a motor home that they pull a 100 miles away once a year. At least that is what you see up here in the NE.

Here it's boats. and if they tow them 20 miles round-trip they have gone a long way.