With gas prices so high, the mpg is very important to me. My '89 F-150 with 5.0 liter V-8 only gets about 16. My father's Golf TDI gets >40 with a torkey and sporty 1.9 litre 110 hp Diesel engine. I wish, Ford would develop an engine rivallign the Tuareg's V-10 Diesel... Here in Thailand, about 85% of all cars and trucks are Diesel powered.

 

The toureg doesnt rival anything ford has to put a diesel in. and no 1.9L no matter HOW souped up will never be "torkey and sporty" I would love to see the idea of a V10-V12 diesel engine implemented in a 1 ton truck. With the HP Ft lbTorque wars, we very well might..... someday

 

It probably will happen eventually.

 

Maybe you should drive one first...

 

I tend to agree with monsta, these 1.9l TDSL engines have over 230lb/ft of torque STANDARD in a car the size of a focus. And I think Suzuki Hayabusa owners would beg to differ that an engine below 2.0l cannot be torquey or sporty.

 

Exploder seems kinda the same size as a Toureg. I bet an exploder would be a might fine ride with the 3.2 Hi pressure direct injected turbo oil burner that MBenz has in their E320. 201 HP @ 4200 RPM and 369 lb-ft @ 1800-2600 RPM.

Add a half inch to the stroke of that bad boy and you'll have to put Dana 60's under your exploder.....

 

Also I reckon a BMW 535d engine would be pretty impressive. A 3.0l inline 6 Turbo Diesel with 272hp and 413lb/ft of torque (thats not a misprint ). Bolt two of these engines to a common crank in a v12 configuration, and I would have one under the hood of my F-350 in place of the PSD... This engine (the 6 cylinder) came 4th in the Paris Dakar rally in a BMW X5, so must be pretty reliable...

 

That Beemer makes the E320 motor look like a delicate flower of an oil burner.

Is it a high pressure direct injection like the MB?

 

The 4.5L V-6 Baby Power Stroke is alive and kicking again. It will be out in FORDs new LCF (low cab forward) trucks sometime in 05. So maybe trucks like the F150 or expidition and so will get it as an option.

 

why would you want a V10-V12 diesel, it didn't work very good for detroit yes they had power but took both a turbo, and a blower. take a look in a semi sometime they all run I-6 engines even the 600hp cats, and cummins putting out over 1850ft/lbs of torque, and that was after they turned them down because the transmissions couldnt handle the 2100+ that they origanally were putting out, and refused to warrenty them.
the main reason for running more, and more cyl is to smooth them out, but to make them into an engine compartment they have to reduce the centerlines of the bores this you end up with a piston the size of a 1.9L 4cyl with less hp, and torque per cubic inch as you add cyl.

 

YUP, high pressure common rail direct injection, also runs twin turbos (similar to those that were on a series VI Mazda RX-7 for you petrolheads), one large one for higher rpm power, a smaller one for low rpm torque, so almost turbo lag YAY

 

Put simply, why not... While it may not be as suitable for a semi, for engines that pulling low weights (comparitively) power becomes more important than torque, more pistons equals (providing the engines are the same capacity) shorter stroke, and having a shorter stroke means lower piston velocities for a given rpm, meaning an engine with more pistons for a given capacity should rev harder therefore you should get more power. There are other factors such as higher rotating mass, increased friction, but all in all more cylinders generally means more power. F1 cars for instance run a V10 because a V12 isn't torquey enough, and a V8 can't rev hard enough to make enough power. And because Turbo Diesels are inherintly very torquey compared to thier petrol powered counteparts, why not add a couple more cylinders to even up the power equation.

 

V12s have the best balance. I would love to drive one.

A v12 is essentially two inline sixes.
http://thrashercharged.com/tech_htm/...ne_design.shtm

 

well bigF350 I guess I can see your point, but I have a diesel for towing, and it walks circles around the v10s, and 460s when we are headed to the races, and when I am pulling loaded corn wagons out of fields ( and please I don't want the dsl vs gas war here, I have both, and prefer MY diesel over my gas for towing, my preference not a point for battle) you mention more pistons equalling shorter stroke well maybe, but it also means smaller lighter parts which equates to less longevity, and strength, plus if I want a high reving engine I will by the gas, but for the pulling I want an engine that makes it's power down low for pulling out of the hole, not something that I have to rev to the sky to make power, Another example when i was still farming I had 2 trucks, first a GMC 1ton dually with a 454, second was a ford F150 I-6, the dually had 4.11 gears tje F150 had 3.08 but for running down the road at 70mph with a load that 454 was the ticket but when I wanted to pull 2 grain wagons out of the field with 300bu of corn on each one I used the F150 because frankly that 6cyl would flat out pull the V8 big block hands down no contest.

 

monsterbaby. You are dead right a 6 sylinder would be much more preferable in such a situation, I use my F-350 predominantely for towing an 8000-9000lb load at around 90-95mph on a dead flat road, so mid range to top end power is pretty important to me. I admit if I was towing this kind of load out of a paddock at low speed a 6 cylinder engine would be much more preferrable. Maybe 2 diesel engine options is the only logical way to go... An inline 6 for those who low down torque is important, and a V12 for those that need/want more mid range and top end power. One can only hope, but for the moment the PSD seems to have the best spread of power (despite the fact we can't get the 6.0l yet...).