V6 or V4 for general Mt driving?

[plainsman48]

To each his own - after 40 years of trucking, I saw the light and went with the new/old technology - Diesel and NG just like they've had in Europe since the early 80's. America will never wean itself from the Gulf nations. Every barrel we import is another $81 in their pockets. That's money leaving the country - not staying here.

I worked on the oil shale project in Colorado decades back - of course we have the technology. We choose not to use it - because our backs are not up against the wall, and oil is still cheaper to import. When it reaches $200/bbl - maybe then Chevron, Exxon and the others will "look" at shale again. There's more shale in the Four Corners than anywhere else on Earth.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by plainsman48

I worked on the oil shale project in Colorado decades back - of course we have the technology. We choose not to use it - because our backs are not up against the wall, and oil is still cheaper to import. When it reaches $200/bbl - maybe then Chevron, Exxon and the others will "look" at shale again. There's more shale in the Four Corners than anywhere else on Earth.

I know plenty about oil shale--lived through the bust in the '80's. I had several people I know who worked directly in the industry, seeing the problems from the inside. They are unanimous in saying that oil shale will never be a practical source of energy. Reason: it simply takes too much energy to produce. Every time the price of energy goes up, the cost of oil shale production increases in lockstep--so it will never be profitable, no matter how expensive oil gets. It's far more financially feasible to produce distillates (like diesel fuel) from coal, but we aren't even doing that.

The cheapest form of "energy" that's out there right now is called "conservation." As several energy experts have testified, if we could magically convert all motor vehicles to diesel engines in the US, we would eliminate oil imports--gas engines compared to diesels are just that inefficient. Beyond that, we are going to be forced to go away from autos and trucks to rail for a lot of both freight and passenger transport, and the totally automobile-dependent model of suburbia we now embrace is going to have to die. And it will, whether we wish it wouldn't or not.

[wanneroo]

At least in regards to the OP, none of this really matters because there isn't really any diesel options available in their chosen type of car they are looking at.

I can say factually from talking to the top brass at certain manufacturers, which my work brings me in contact with, that diesels are certainly up for consideration and development if there is a market demand for them in passenger cars. At the moment though except for a select few that buy a MB or VW diesel, that demand is not there.

[Mike from back east]

Originally Posted by wanneroo

At least in regards to the OP, none of this really matters because there isn't really any diesel options available in their chosen type of car they are looking at.

I can say factually from talking to the top brass at certain manufacturers, which my work brings me in contact with, that diesels are certainly up for consideration and development if there is a market demand for them in passenger cars. At the moment though except for a select few that buy a MB or VW diesel, that demand is not there.

I think part of that lack of demand goes back to bad experiences with GM diesels of the early 1980's. We bought a 1982 OLDS Cutlass and they did their best to sell me a diesel. It was an extra thousand dollars and you had to take other options, like two batteries, etc. I declined and went with a small gas V-8 (which also proved a lame-assed engine).

I was later told GM used a gas V-8 as the basis for that diesel and GM did not beef up the crankshaft and bearings, which proved way too weak to deal with the stresses of being a diesel. I heard that many of these engines self-destructed and it all ended up a fiasco for GM.

A year after I bought my OLDS, the price of diesel was 25-cents higher than gas. I also recall the VW diesel of my friend at the time, which woke up the neighborhood when he started the thing, after he sat there and let the "glow plugs" get warm before starting it, etc.

[jazzlover]

Here's the scoop on those 1970's-era GM diesels. They were indeed based on GM's small-block gas V8. In a panic to get them on the market because of the late 1970's oil shock, they were not tested sufficiently and the early years' models of the engine had numerous problems. I know--I owned one of them. I managed to get 60,000 miles out of the original engine in an Oldsmobile. The publicity was so bad for GM that they warrantied my engine (partly because I had kept exact service records showing that it had proper maintenance). By the time I replaced the engine, GM had most all of the bugs worked out and the new engine lasted me another 60K on the car, and it was going strong for the second owner at nearly a 100K on the new engine. The real problem with the car in the long run was everything else besides the engine--like most GM cars of the era, it was rife with electrical problems, shabby body work, paint, etc.

My neighbor had a 1983 Olds Toronado with the 350 diesel V8--by that time, the bugs were worked out of the engine design. He was a traveling salesman and put over 300,000 miles on that engine and car with minimal problems. He got 30 mpg on the highway--unheard of in a full-size car at that time. But the damage was done with early problem-riddled diesels that GM sold, and that is all the American public remembers about it.

And, today's diesel engines bear almost no resemblence to those old diesels, except that they burn diesel fuel and are still compression-ignition engines. Consider this little factoid: Back in the 1960's and especially in the 1970's--after emission controls were required on gas engines--it was considered quite a feat to get 1 horsepower per cubic inch out of a gasoline engine. Most could only manage half that. Fast forward to today, there are numerous turbodiesel engines on the market now (mostly overseas) that get nearly that horsepower per cubic inch--and diesels aren't even known for making big horsepower for their size--torque is their strong suit. So, diesels have come a long way in the past 30 years--way farther than their gas counterparts. But, most Americans can't be bothered with such facts. All they can say is that "diesels suck" with no facts to back that up, anymore.

[wanneroo]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

I think part of that lack of demand goes back to bad experiences with GM diesels of the early 1980's. We bought a 1982 OLDS Cutlass and they did their best to sell me a diesel. It was an extra thousand dollars and you had to take other options, like two batteries, etc. I declined and went with a small gas V-8 (which also proved a lame-assed engine).

I was later told GM used a gas V-8 as the basis for that diesel and GM did not beef up the crankshaft and bearings, which proved way too weak to deal with the stresses of being a diesel. I heard that many of these engines self-destructed and it all ended up a fiasco for GM.

A year after I bought my OLDS, the price of diesel was 25-cents higher than gas. I also recall the VW diesel of my friend at the time, which woke up the neighborhood when he started the thing, after he sat there and let the "glow plugs" get warm before starting it, etc.

Yes I was still very young but I remember quite a few diesels around back at that time, none of them really clean or reliable for the most part. I'm sure that can play a part in some reluctance on people that were around back then in regards to purchasing today.

I know in Europe the technology has come a long way, Audi and Peugeot running competitive and winning diesel sportscar prototypes at Le Mans and Sebring, as well as VW running successfully diesel production based race cars at the Nurburgring 24 hour race.

At the moment though for most Americans, the cost savings and other issues have not shown themselves to be overly advantageous to the consumer to the point they want diesels in passenger cars. Manufacturers are in the business to make money so if there was demand they are certainly ready for it. As I said earlier in this thread, there were manufacturers planning back in 2007 when oil prices were way over inflated and the economy was OK to bring diesels to mid size cars, but the Carpocalypse killed that off.

So there isn't any conspiracy or that the manufacturers are secretly hiding diesels, just that the free market hasn't demonstrated that it wants them as products and until they do, the status quo shall remain.

[Mike from back east]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

... The real problem with the car in the long run was everything else besides the engine--like most GM cars of the era, it was rife with electrical problems, shabby body work, paint, etc.....

Thanks for the info, confirms all I thought I knew and more. Yes, my 1982 OLDS Cutlass had problems with: Tachometer, power antenna, power rear window vent, power driver's window, power driver's seat, radio, etc. It was my first and only GM product.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

Thanks for the info, confirms all I thought I knew and more. Yes, my 1982 OLDS Cutlass had problems with: Tachometer, power antenna, power rear window vent, power driver's window, power driver's seat, radio, etc. It was my first and only GM product.

Just for you, Mike, here is the owner's manual on a REAL diesel engine. Off-topic, I realize, but you should have fun with it.

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/manual/es44dc-om.pdf