(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

New dieseltruck Emissions

A

Anonymous-0

Well-known Member
Has anyone bought a new diesel truck ?..How is that Urea Exhaust injection stuff working Out ? couple guys and i were garage talking the other nite , and we are afraid of all the consequences , please tell me our fears are unfounded
 
From what I've observed first hand its even worse than anticipated. Sort of like back in the 70s and early 80's when they first put cats and air pumps on cars.
 
We have a 2011 Duramax with it, So far we only have 300 miles on the truck but I will give you all an update after pulling season gets rolling here. I believe the dealer said it uses one tank of the urea about every oil change. So I will find out here eventually. But wow is that truck quick
 
Though I have no first hand experience, I expect the worst and decided against buying a new 2011, 2500/3500 diesel PU for this very reason.

I'll wait two or three years to see how the dust settles and will seriously consider a gasoline version.

Do not believe the dealers regarding urea usage.

Dean
 
The diesel option is so ridiculously expensive that it would be hard to justify buying an oil burner over a gas truck. you would really have to look at it as a long term investment. As far as the urea injection goes, I have no idea. Call me simple but it seems counter-productive to take engines that were already very efficient (my 03 cummins gets a steady 17.5 mpg) and saddle them with emmisions control equipment until their fuel mileage drops to near gas-burner territory. Where does the cleanliness of the emissions balance with the increased fuel consupmtion? Gotta love it.
 
I dunno, what consequences ya talkin' 'bout?

I pull the livin' snot out of mine and had to add 2 gallon of urea at 5700 miles.

Power beyond your wildest dreams; plus, loaded to the nuts it gets 15.9 mpg. Gotta love that double overdrive. Also, the engine brake will stand ya on your nose.

Light years ahead of my old '08 Powerstroke.

Allan
 
If ya run clear out, it will run okay until ya shut 'er off. Then, it won't start again until ya fill it back up.

Heck, ya don't even know it is on there. Just a simple siphon device anyway; after the fact back at the exhaust.

Allan
 
If ya run clear out, it will run okay until ya shut 'er off. Then, it won't start again until ya fill it back up.

Heck, ya don't even know it is on there. Just a simple siphon device anyway; after the fact back at the exhaust.

Allan
 
Based on what I've been hearing so far all of the new emmision related crap is just one huge PITA, and in the larger trucks has been that way for a number of years now. The urea is a water based mixture that will give problems in extreem cold temps (ie- typical winters in alot of places the guys on here live). Then when you add particularte filters on to the list it creates a whole new round of problems from the truck not being used enough for the thing to regenerate properly to it starting a regen cycle about the time you need to stop and have the computer telling tyou not to stop.
I don't claim to be an expert on any of the new mess so I don't have a clue how every system operates on each and every vehicle but I do know I've talked to alot of guys that have trucks with the emmisions crap on them and for the most part when things are working they work great, but when they go wrong it gets real expensive real fast......
 
Just another way to suck more money out of you. Tell me again how good the new trucks are, I keep forgeting. You get what you vote for.
 
If you are working it hard with very little idle time you will have much less problems than the guy who putts around from coffee shop to Wally world etc. Light use and idling time equals lower exhaust temp which is the enemy of particulate filter. Unless you use the truck and can afford to trade before warranty expires I would think twice about getting a new diesel truck of any make.
 
Probably why GM is holding back on introducing the direct injection V8 gasser they road demonstrated back on 2007.
Diesel sales would drop except for the die hard purists, status seekers. And the 1 in a 100 diesel owners that really can justify full time trailer pulling.
GM wouldn't be able to recoup their research and development costs on the Duramax. If buyers went with gassers instead.
Look at the GM four and six cylinders. Try to find the rare few that are not direct injection.
 
NCWayne, I think you need to do a little more research before you post inaccurate details although you put a disclaimer at the end of your post.

There are two different technologies that you just mentioned. Diesel Particulate Filters with Cooled Exhaust Gas Recirculation (DPF w/ CEGR) and Selective Catalytic Reductiion (SCR). These are very different systems.

You statement that Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) will give problems in extreme cold temps is not true. The tanks on the vehicles are built for expansion and have a heating mechanism built in to thaw the tank out. The way to think about SCR is this, it is basically a Tier 2 engine, with an exhaust after treatment system. The engine is allowed to perform at its peak. (Tier 2 engines were more fuel efficient thant Tier 3) DEF is added after the fact. Nothing is added to the engine, just the exhaust.

Particulate filters would apply to the DPF w/CEGR systems (current Dodge pickups [not cab chassis] and Tier IV John Deere.) These units inject diesel into the filter to burn off particulate matter (regen cycle). These units also pump exhaust gas back into the engine. So, burn of particulates with fuel (more heat) and put exhaust gas back into the engine (more heat). When the DPF becomes plugged (this will happen) you have a serious issue.

SCR is where you will see everything end up where it is feasible to add a catalyst tank for the chemical reaction to occur. On smaller units, you will see DPF systems, but it is based on the number of hours and the total room for putting the emissions package on the unit.
 
Allan, on CIH and NH tractors, once the unit runs out (you have an hour once the warnings start displaying and making sounds) the power will be de-rated and put into a limp home mode.
 
the price you pay for a p/u today, i rather buy a 650 ford,4500chev, f/liner,ih, that don"t have all that c@@p on it. mileage won"t be all that different. i can put a custom bed hauler on it.
 
colekicker,
you seem to know your stuff, but I agree with Dean: "Why?"

The eco-nazis (EPA) and tree huggers will not be satisfied until every stream in this country is crystal clear and the air is pure oxygen and nitrogen with ZERO pollutants. The costs to accomplish this are (will be) astronomical and a stranglehold on any productive economic gains. Millions are wasted on R & D and unnecessary vehicle costs to every consumer to try and meet the ever changing targets that bureaucrats, junk-scientist and Al Gore followers impose on vehicle manufacturers and energy producers as well as us, the consumers (think "ozone action days").

Blame it on "government creep" into our daily lives. As was posted some time ago on this forum, the govt is proposing that every new vehicle be equipped with rear cameras to try and eliminate some 800 deaths per year from people backing up over people. This will cost several billion dollars PER YEAR to consumers and there will be NO guarantee that any lives will be saved. (If you don't look behind your car when you back up now what makes anybody think you'll look at a camera picture?)

My diesel engine on my tractor is simple, efficient and reliable. Doesn't need a computer to stay running. When it breaks, I don't need a PHD in physics to figure out what system went wrong, nor do I need pee in a tank to make it run. We need to get back to the KISS philosophy.
 
How about this? An article in the Arizona Republic monday was bragging up the fact that the FederaL DOT and the Arizona ADEQ were funding the installation of Catalitic Converters on Mexican freight hauling trucks[diesel tractors mostly ] free of charge to the Mexicans.About 300 have been retrofitted so far and the American tax payer is footing the entire bill.Mexico is not involved at all. What is wrong with this picture,this is enough to start a Revolution over.
See it all here.
 
OK.....here is my rather simple observation. Some people can put holes in it and feel free to do so, as maybe I will learn something.
I think perhaps we are on the wrong track in dealing with emissions. for rough figuring let's say I put 20,000 miles a year on my truck. (may not next year @ 5 dollar fuel) My 95 dodge averaged about 18 miles per gallon and my present 04 averages about 12 (but the air is cleaner....)Do the math and I now use 555 gallons more a year of fuel doing the same miles I was doing before. I don't know what that translates to in extra gallons used in the US but it is a big number. Now let's ad the extra chemistry in todays fuel.....$$$..Clean? So, the way I see it is that I am distributing this extra 555 gallons of high chemistry diesel into the atmosphere and on the road. I realize that there was a point that as a nation we had to set some guidelines but it seems to me that it may be time to revisit those guidelines. I have a feeling that if we could use our technocracy to get the absolute most BTUs to the road we would pollute less and use less fuel. It would require a huge change in direction but I would imagine my P/U could be designed to get substantially better mileage than it does. Take that mileage to 40 mpg on my truck and I would be using almost 500 gallons less/year than I was 15 years ago.
I do not claim to have lots of facts here but what I have presented is a reasonable scenario.
A final note is that this will probably not happen as the powers that be are too entrenched to even look at the idea.
OK, Have at me!
Andy
 
What a load of crap spending money on something no one wants or needs, well thats what they do with most of the rest of our money. Might aswell give it to mexico as some jackwad on wellfare.
 
Just traded in 2007 Chevy 3500 for a new 2011 Chevy 2500. New truck has what i call magic fluid(Diesel Exhaust Fluid). Picked the truck up and with in a few days the DEF sensor came on. Dealer changed fluid sensor went off for a few days. Then came back on got mad called onstar they ran a test and gave me a number to chevy engineering. Found out that the pump on the tank was bad. What the deal with 2.5 hitch size, they say it for more payload but you need a reduce?
 
There are wispers and rumours that small lawn, garden, yard, landsaping & even farm equipment. Could maybe go to direct injection gas instead of trying to meet diesel emissions specs?
As previously stated. The green weenie tech haters won't stop introducing progessively tighter emissions specs. Until internal & external combustion is regulated out of existance.And electric car motor cooling vents are filtered.
Anti-gunners have done it here already. Rather than an outright ban.They just made the rules so expensive, complex and impractical. Most hunters have retired and very few new hunters are starting out.
 
If direct injection was so great and durable then semis and tractors would have it. You cant beat the longevity of a diesel. Why are you such a hater of people who own diesel trucks? I have a Dodge cummmins, gets 20 mpg, lets see a gas get that and take the abuse I give it. Can you prove that only 1 in 100 need a diesel truck? Do you have an emprical data to back that up? You sound like one of those people who rip on others for the things you yourself dont have.
 
Because it is a proven technology that works. The majority of people are posting about how they don't know what the outcome is going to be. Why not give them the answer?
 
Read it again. " small lawn, garden, yard, landscaping & even farm equipment"
Did you by chance note the words "small","lawn","yard" ? Would it have been lost on you if I had also prefixed instead of inferring small farm equipment?
Now just what exactly do "semis and tractors" have to do in a conversation with? Low cost " small lawn, garden, yard, landscaping & even small farm equipment?
Two different markets, price ranges, applications,inspection and maintenance.
Ever look at the weight,size and cost of emissions equipment. On equipment under the 10-15 thousand $$$ range compared to the 50,100+ thousand $$$ equipment range?
Have you read through the specs and dates for various HP ranges of engines for the Tier I,II,III & Tier IV engines. I've posted it here a couple of times.
I priced a diesel when purchasing my truck and the fuel savings with diesel that costs more per gallon than gasoline. And the increased service costs. It was going to take a decade to break even. Who then wants to pay for out of warranty diesel repairs on a truck with 10+ yrs of rust?
I happen to look at and count the number of diesel pickups around here. Which are used as a commuter car for one person's transportation.
I didn't say that there isn't a market where a diesel truck is applicable. Just that very few diesels purchased and used where diesel would be an advantage.
Ever look under the hood of a 2011 gasser and a 2011 diesel? The gasser is the simpler,cheaper and more reliable engine.
Seems many folk are still comparing a 1970's to mid 80's gasser pickup. To a 1990's mechanical injection pump diesel.
 
There are different tattletale systems depending on the manufacturer. Some do not shut down but simply do not allow a restart. Some derate... Some actually do nothing...
Some can be fooled by simply adding water.

Rod
 
Well Guys, just come in ., thanx for your input , i Read all your Reponses And Had a beer , Figured there would be alot and am surprised it didn't go POOF . I need to venyt my Frustration about modern B/St.... sounds like we got pee and BS from the EPA .. my 95 Cummins Still gets 20-22 mpgwith 235 tires on the back ,, andy c hit it on the head about annual miles traveled and fuel used to get there ,, we use more fuel and do not go as far or carry as much payload ,, the failed Modern B/st on fuel injected gas no power engines has now coming over to diesels , ,, this modern tech junk is DISUSTING, my son just blew $300 on his Ford Exploder , for cam sensors and coil packs , hope now it gets more than 12mpg . IMHO I would take a vacuum advance , hi compression , carburated motor v-8 or 6 over any of this new junk . ..my Dad had a 70 Galaxie 500 that would easily get 18 miles to the gallon with a 2 barrel carb and still easily bury the speedometer and burn rubber ,, that 351 lasted for over 350 ,000 miles and was still seen rumnnig until 10 yrs ago . any 302 -351 built after 1980 is absolute boat anchors .and they were Fords smoothest most dependable engines 40 yrs ago . we lost our common sense in the name of air pollution .. just ground the damjets , if you want to keep the air clean .. . This country would be better off without the EPA and Dpt of Energy and a few other$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$WASTERS ,.. Love To Here Donald nnalert tell them.. ALL YOU ARE FIRED ! ,
 
Scroll down to the bottom of the page in this link to where it says "Interim Tier 4 Exhaust Filter Cleaning". A video will open that shows JD's exhaust system and answers a lot of questions.

http://www.jdvideocontent.com/

What does 5000 hrs. equate to in miles I wonder?
 
One boss at work got a 2011 Ford diesel. He knew NOTHING about the urea-does not even know where the tank is located-BUT-he does notice it shoots flames out the exhaust every so often! He says his gets really bad mileage-something around 11. That is in town, out of town, loaded, empty, just gets 11mpg. Kinda hard to justify that expense with that poor of mileage!
 
Just got back from a camping trip with Dad and brother from the mountains of N.C. pulling a 30' travel trailer loaded with gear weight about 13,000. '11 2500 duramax. Gotta say I couldn't believe how that thing would pull those mountains with nary a strain! Set the cruise control and engine brake and it would hold the speed up and down automatically. That 6 speed allison is something else. I will say, My dad has said his fuel mileage around town unloaded and day to day was only 13-14 mpg but when he took trip to my house on the coast (about 265 miles) He got 24 mpg! I guess it does need to be used more than short runs. The mountain trip w/trailer was 10.5 mpg. But with the road conditions, interstate 40 in western Carolina to Tennessee is rather challenging. Not to mention the last 30 miles with up to 12 percent grades and twisting roads. All in all, about 7,000 miles on it and seems to be worth it.

Scott
 
I was listening to a fella while listening to the Midnight Trucking Radio Network on my AM radio talking about just this. What I didn't know or realize, is to drive a diesel semi into California, there are all kinds of costly emissions to make, or the tractor is not allowed into or to deliver into California, however exactly. So this fella was talking about his new tractor that meets the emissions and can deliver, but his old tractor does not, and as he is restoring it, he can't afford to modify it to bring up to California emissions code, so he will never be able to work it or make money there.

NOW HERE IS THE RUB...our tax money is being used to bring Mexican trucks up to snuff by modifying them so that they can work California. We ARE paying to have Mexican trucks revamped with tax payer money, while American trucking companies and independent truckers are on their own to flip the cost out of their wallets, or too bad, no work. Something very wrong with that picture.

Mark
 
If your looking for a new Dodge only the C&C's have urea this year the others have DPF & EGR. DPF & EGR are easy to remove. For about $2,000 you can get all kinds of new fun parts, and you can spend way less if you just want to run code free.Easy job to do in an afternoon if you have a helper.
 
I understand the diference in the systems, my comments were made based on what I've heard from guys with the actual vehicles as well as what I've read in various trade magazines. I understand that the urea tanks have heaters, etc to keep them from gelling when in operation, but how long and how much battery power does it take to thaw out a gelled/frozen urea tank on a parked truck. if you need to go from point A to point B in cold weather how long is it going to take to thaw out the tank before you leave, or are you going to no choice but to plug the vehicle in overnight to keep it thawed. Maybe it's not a problem for a semi in a truck stop or a homeowner in their own yard, but it's a major problem for guys like me that work out of town and park in motel parking lots or in some cases the vacant lot next to the motel lot because it's full. Even then I've only seen one motel in my travels that actually had outlets accesible to vehicles in the lot....and then they had to run their cords across the travel lane to get to their trucks. In other words any water based product is going to be a problem for ALOT of people come winter time.

As far as the particulate filters I've heard numerous problems on them from a friend that works at a dealership. Everything from premature plugging due to alot of starting and stopping (ie garbage trucks, busses, etc) and the vehicle never really being under enough load to get the exhaust system hot enough to self regen. Then they came out with the fuel fired regen systems that have to be kept in use once they start to regen or they don't complete the burn and subsequently cause problems.

Like I said I don't claim to know everything about all of these systems. However I do know the basics of how each works or is supposed to work and between that and the problems I've heard related to me they are all one HUGE, EXPENSIVE, PITA........
 
Have a customer with a crane running a first generation, 30's technology, slow turning, low HP, High torque Murphy diesel engine. The operator said with it he burned 30 to 40 gallons of fuel to get X amount of production per day. They upgraded to a newer machine with an electronic controlled engine. According to the same operator he now uses 130 to 140 gallons of fuel per day and was only moving about half to 2/3 the amount of material per day.....but he now had an air conditioned cab..........

Also I hear all the time about all the money saved on fuel with the new systems but Ive never seen anything relating the money spent over and above the 'saved fuel cost' when one of the new fuel systems has problems....
 
Old diesel pickups got much better MPG's.

After removeing EGR & DPF from my 6.7 cummins I get 2 MPG better and have more power. Emmissions equipment takes power and they wouldn't have had to go to 6.7 if it weren't for emmisions. Most 5.9's got pretty good MPG's. Just think how good of mileage these pickups would be getting if they built them for mileage and put emmision on the back burner.Think about all the wasted fuel and all the smoke blowing oil rigs working to keep pumping more oil for less effecient motors.Maybe fuel would even be cheaper if we didn't use so much.
 
Yes the 2 1/2 inch hitch is for more weight. The reducer is for your two inch hitch that most people already have, to use on your "smaller" trailers.

Rick
 
(quoted from post at 07:34:57 04/13/11) Has anyone bought a new diesel truck ?..How is that Urea Exhaust injection stuff working Out ? couple guys and i were garage talking the other nite , and we are afraid of all the consequences , please tell me our fears are unfounded
Click to expand...

Plenty of experts on here. Simply put, it amounts to increased NOX emmissions caused by bio fuel additions. It is an exhaust scrubbing system to reduce emmissions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Absent Minded Farmer
A Saturday video three fer.... featuring the "new" Scout....
Replies
10
Views
890
Mike Groom
M
J
Coolant additive for cylinder cavitation pitting, Deere
2
Replies
20
Views
984
BarnyardEngineering
BarnyardEngineering
R
MF 1085
Replies
4
Views
490
RCP
R
P
New track loader owner
Replies
11
Views
1K
WilBury
WilBury
C
TD40 restoration so far/burning oil
Replies
9
Views
380
Janicholson
Janicholson
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top