Fine time to drop the V10 Ford! *tongue in cheek*
#1
04-02-2006, 03:26 AM
Fine time to drop the V10 Ford! *tongue in cheek*
Captchas just emailed this to me. Whachya think?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/b...b1diesels.html
New limits on tailpipe emissions are expected to jack up truck prices
By Mark Maynard
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
April 1, 2006
A new diesel exhaust emission standard that goes into effect Jan. 1 will help clear the air, but at a significant cost to diesel-driving consumers and commercial truckers.
Limits on tailpipe emissions of nitrogen oxides and soot will be tightened by 90 percent over the current national standard. And the standard will increase again in 2010, with another round of equipment expected to be added to engines to further treat pollutants.
Diesel engines for 2007 heavy-duty pickups and larger trucks are being adapted to run on ultra low sulfur diesel fuel, which goes on sale in California in September and the rest of the country by mid-October.
The added cost of emissions equipment could range from $2,000 to $5,000 per vehicle for diesel pickups, vans and medium-duty work trucks, according to a document distributed by General Motor to its dealers.
Those costs are in addition to the higher retail price of the diesel engine, which can add as much as $6,000, depending on manufacturer.
The new fuel also will affect Californians who buy new-generation diesel pickups for travel to Baja California. Mexico's higher-sulfur diesel fuel will eventually clog the emissions treatment equipment and in severe cases lead to engine shutdown.
“Life as the dealers know it will end,” said Barry Lehmer, general manager of North County GMC Jeep Kia. “Consequently, there is 'manic panic' to get 2006 diesels.”
International, the truckmaker, expects to increase prices $5,000 to $6,000 per vehicle for its midrange diesel-powered trucks and buses. Heavy-duty Class 8 truck-tractors (with Caterpillar and Cummins engines) will see increases of $7,000 to $10,000, with additional charges for engines that have higher horsepower requiring dual aftertreatment.
Ford would not comment on its future pricing, except to say that the new standards will add cost for additional equipment. “Whether Ford will pass that cost along to the consumer is certainly a consideration,” a spokesman said.
The heavy-duty, crew-cab four-wheel drive pickup is the most popular model in San Diego, Lehmer said.
Suggested retail prices for a GM truck range from $43,000 to $53,000, which includes the option price of $6,030 for the Duramax 6.6 liter V-8 diesel engine and heavy-duty transmission.
The new diesel engines will feature cooled exhaust gas recirculation (common to passenger cars), a particulate filter to capture soot and some engine modifications to enable electronic calibration of engine management to minimize exhaust and fuel consumption.
Those added treatment systems are expected to cause a 4 percent loss of fuel efficiency, according to the Energy Information Administration. However, technological improvements are expected offset the loss by 2015.
The EIA reports the new fuel will cost 7 cents to almost 9 cents more per gallon “and could be higher if supply falls short of demand,” said EIA spokesman Bin Zhang.
The added emissions equipment will not be desirable to San Diegans, Lehmer said, because of the added cost and limited travel range to Mexico.
“I expect it will cut my truck sales 30 percent,” Lehmer said. “Next January my diesel sales will be 10 percent, then 20 percent in February and sometime by the middle of next summer I will be selling trucks again.” He also expects a boost in the resale value of late-model diesels.
Diesel engines are preferred for their reputation of long life, improved fuel economy over a gasoline engine and the power to tow 12,000-pound travel trailers and recreational vehicles.
But much of that advantage will be lost with the higher vehicle prices and the higher cost of fuel. In the San Diego area, diesel fuel costs about the same as premium unleaded gasoline.
The payback period to recapture the initial cost of a diesel vehicle over a gasoline model is a little more than six years, when driving 15,000 miles a year. The payback period for the 2007 diesel would be close to 10 years, according to GM.
“The only reason to own a diesel now would be to tow an extremely heavy trailer,” Lehmer said. “The heaviest tow rating for a GM light-duty diesel is 14,000 pounds; the gas motor is 12,000 pounds.”
San Diegans who drive 2007 diesel trucks might avoid trips to Mexico, though experts say that just a tank or two of higher sulfur fuel is not likely to shorten the life cycle of the new engine's filter, experts say.
The Baja 1000 off-road races could be affected. There are 300,000 registered off-highway vehicles in the East and North County area, said Ed Soens, president of the San Diego Off Road Coalition.
“And I would say 1.5 percent of those users drives a diesel truck to pull their trailers for the bikes, buggies and ATVs,” he said. “If they are not going to be able to burn fuel from Mexico, and Mexico doesn't allow you to take fuel across the border, that will curtail a lot of activity down there unless somebody can make a deal.”
Pemex, the national oil company for Mexico, has plans for making improvements to its diesel fuel, but no new standards have been announced.
“There is an intention to considerably reduce sulfur content in diesel fuel, probably to about 30 parts per million, but there is no way that this will happen in the short term despite good intentions,” said David Shields, an independent energy analyst in Mexico City.
The so-called green diesel engines use high-pressure direct injection systems and fine-tuned electronic fuel metering to control smoke and soot. The engines are designed to run on the new cleaner ultra-low sulfur diesel. The diesel particulate filter, or diffuser, collects soot by circulating exhaust gases through a series of ceramic honeycomb channels where the soot is trapped.
General Motors claims a price advantage over the competition because its diesel truck engine already has been using recirculated cooled exhaust gas. A particulate filter will be added to the 2007 trucks. Ford and Dodge are expected to use similar systems.
The most noticeable addition will be the filter, a cylinder about 10 inches across and 16 inches long, that will attach to the exhaust pipe.
GM has not said when the new diesels will be in dealerships, but Lehmer does not expect them for the traditional October new-car launch time.
“It seems as if they are telling us to be ready to sell gasoline (engines) because of the price differential, which would be an $8,000 difference,” he said. The report also promotes GM as the only medium-duty truck maker that has a viable gasoline engine for heavy-duty applications, such as rental trucks and other fleet uses. - Wake up FORD!
GM's 8.1 liter V-8, which is rated for 325 horsepower and 450 foot-pounds of torque, is a $950 option in the pickup trucks, plus $1,200 for the heavy-duty transmission. Either engine is rated to pull a 12,000-pound trailer.
It should be noted that the 3V V10 is rated to tow 15,000lbs with the 4.30 rear end. - monsta
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/b...b1diesels.html
New limits on tailpipe emissions are expected to jack up truck prices
By Mark Maynard
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
April 1, 2006
A new diesel exhaust emission standard that goes into effect Jan. 1 will help clear the air, but at a significant cost to diesel-driving consumers and commercial truckers.
Limits on tailpipe emissions of nitrogen oxides and soot will be tightened by 90 percent over the current national standard. And the standard will increase again in 2010, with another round of equipment expected to be added to engines to further treat pollutants.
Diesel engines for 2007 heavy-duty pickups and larger trucks are being adapted to run on ultra low sulfur diesel fuel, which goes on sale in California in September and the rest of the country by mid-October.
The added cost of emissions equipment could range from $2,000 to $5,000 per vehicle for diesel pickups, vans and medium-duty work trucks, according to a document distributed by General Motor to its dealers.
Those costs are in addition to the higher retail price of the diesel engine, which can add as much as $6,000, depending on manufacturer.
The new fuel also will affect Californians who buy new-generation diesel pickups for travel to Baja California. Mexico's higher-sulfur diesel fuel will eventually clog the emissions treatment equipment and in severe cases lead to engine shutdown.
“Life as the dealers know it will end,” said Barry Lehmer, general manager of North County GMC Jeep Kia. “Consequently, there is 'manic panic' to get 2006 diesels.”
International, the truckmaker, expects to increase prices $5,000 to $6,000 per vehicle for its midrange diesel-powered trucks and buses. Heavy-duty Class 8 truck-tractors (with Caterpillar and Cummins engines) will see increases of $7,000 to $10,000, with additional charges for engines that have higher horsepower requiring dual aftertreatment.
Ford would not comment on its future pricing, except to say that the new standards will add cost for additional equipment. “Whether Ford will pass that cost along to the consumer is certainly a consideration,” a spokesman said.
The heavy-duty, crew-cab four-wheel drive pickup is the most popular model in San Diego, Lehmer said.
Suggested retail prices for a GM truck range from $43,000 to $53,000, which includes the option price of $6,030 for the Duramax 6.6 liter V-8 diesel engine and heavy-duty transmission.
The new diesel engines will feature cooled exhaust gas recirculation (common to passenger cars), a particulate filter to capture soot and some engine modifications to enable electronic calibration of engine management to minimize exhaust and fuel consumption.
Those added treatment systems are expected to cause a 4 percent loss of fuel efficiency, according to the Energy Information Administration. However, technological improvements are expected offset the loss by 2015.
The EIA reports the new fuel will cost 7 cents to almost 9 cents more per gallon “and could be higher if supply falls short of demand,” said EIA spokesman Bin Zhang.
The added emissions equipment will not be desirable to San Diegans, Lehmer said, because of the added cost and limited travel range to Mexico.
“I expect it will cut my truck sales 30 percent,” Lehmer said. “Next January my diesel sales will be 10 percent, then 20 percent in February and sometime by the middle of next summer I will be selling trucks again.” He also expects a boost in the resale value of late-model diesels.
Diesel engines are preferred for their reputation of long life, improved fuel economy over a gasoline engine and the power to tow 12,000-pound travel trailers and recreational vehicles.
But much of that advantage will be lost with the higher vehicle prices and the higher cost of fuel. In the San Diego area, diesel fuel costs about the same as premium unleaded gasoline.
The payback period to recapture the initial cost of a diesel vehicle over a gasoline model is a little more than six years, when driving 15,000 miles a year. The payback period for the 2007 diesel would be close to 10 years, according to GM.
“The only reason to own a diesel now would be to tow an extremely heavy trailer,” Lehmer said. “The heaviest tow rating for a GM light-duty diesel is 14,000 pounds; the gas motor is 12,000 pounds.”
San Diegans who drive 2007 diesel trucks might avoid trips to Mexico, though experts say that just a tank or two of higher sulfur fuel is not likely to shorten the life cycle of the new engine's filter, experts say.
The Baja 1000 off-road races could be affected. There are 300,000 registered off-highway vehicles in the East and North County area, said Ed Soens, president of the San Diego Off Road Coalition.
“And I would say 1.5 percent of those users drives a diesel truck to pull their trailers for the bikes, buggies and ATVs,” he said. “If they are not going to be able to burn fuel from Mexico, and Mexico doesn't allow you to take fuel across the border, that will curtail a lot of activity down there unless somebody can make a deal.”
Pemex, the national oil company for Mexico, has plans for making improvements to its diesel fuel, but no new standards have been announced.
“There is an intention to considerably reduce sulfur content in diesel fuel, probably to about 30 parts per million, but there is no way that this will happen in the short term despite good intentions,” said David Shields, an independent energy analyst in Mexico City.
The so-called green diesel engines use high-pressure direct injection systems and fine-tuned electronic fuel metering to control smoke and soot. The engines are designed to run on the new cleaner ultra-low sulfur diesel. The diesel particulate filter, or diffuser, collects soot by circulating exhaust gases through a series of ceramic honeycomb channels where the soot is trapped.
General Motors claims a price advantage over the competition because its diesel truck engine already has been using recirculated cooled exhaust gas. A particulate filter will be added to the 2007 trucks. Ford and Dodge are expected to use similar systems.
The most noticeable addition will be the filter, a cylinder about 10 inches across and 16 inches long, that will attach to the exhaust pipe.
GM has not said when the new diesels will be in dealerships, but Lehmer does not expect them for the traditional October new-car launch time.
“It seems as if they are telling us to be ready to sell gasoline (engines) because of the price differential, which would be an $8,000 difference,” he said. The report also promotes GM as the only medium-duty truck maker that has a viable gasoline engine for heavy-duty applications, such as rental trucks and other fleet uses. - Wake up FORD!
GM's 8.1 liter V-8, which is rated for 325 horsepower and 450 foot-pounds of torque, is a $950 option in the pickup trucks, plus $1,200 for the heavy-duty transmission. Either engine is rated to pull a 12,000-pound trailer.
It should be noted that the 3V V10 is rated to tow 15,000lbs with the 4.30 rear end. - monsta
Last edited by Monsta; 04-02-2006 at 03:30 AM.
#2
04-02-2006, 06:00 AM
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing that makes sense in this whole thing (Ref. Ford dropping the V-10) is:
1: Ford has a new, big V-8 in the works that will out perform the V-10.
2: They want to eliminate any gas engine capable of towing so consumers who want towing capabilities will be forced to pay the 10 - 12 thousand dollars extra to keep their diesel program alive.
1: Ford has a new, big V-8 in the works that will out perform the V-10.
2: They want to eliminate any gas engine capable of towing so consumers who want towing capabilities will be forced to pay the 10 - 12 thousand dollars extra to keep their diesel program alive.
#3
04-02-2006, 06:08 AM
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Augusta, SC
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fortunate one.
Thanks for the article. Good reading, well, kinda...
Ford doesn't have a gas engine for any serious pulling, eh? This whole issue makes zero sense to me.
I must say that I feel extremely fortunate to have gotten my order in under the deadline for an '06 V10. Thanks once again to all you peeps on this forum.
I ordered my fifth wheel yesterday. Forest River Sandpiper 305RLW. Dry weight is around 9500 lbs, and even when I load it down for a couple of weeks on the road, the load shouldn't exceed 11.5K. From what you guys are saying here, I won't have any issues dragging this humpback whale down the road. Eight to ten weeks from now I will be making a road trip to Lakeview OH to pick'er up, then heading back to SC. That will give me several weeks to properly break in my truck before pulling a load.
Michael
Ford doesn't have a gas engine for any serious pulling, eh? This whole issue makes zero sense to me.
I must say that I feel extremely fortunate to have gotten my order in under the deadline for an '06 V10. Thanks once again to all you peeps on this forum.
I ordered my fifth wheel yesterday. Forest River Sandpiper 305RLW. Dry weight is around 9500 lbs, and even when I load it down for a couple of weeks on the road, the load shouldn't exceed 11.5K. From what you guys are saying here, I won't have any issues dragging this humpback whale down the road. Eight to ten weeks from now I will be making a road trip to Lakeview OH to pick'er up, then heading back to SC. That will give me several weeks to properly break in my truck before pulling a load.
Michael
#4
04-02-2006, 08:44 AM
#5
04-02-2006, 09:45 AM
You know what? I wonder if the 3-valve V10 was done "under the table" and not much of the rest of Ford realized it was going on (as in marketing) nor how much power it makes and how it stacks up to the diesel?
But then, there was a reason the '89 t-bird with supercharged 3.8L V6 couldn't put out more than the 220 rated HP. The Mustang 5.0 was currently at 225 and they just couldn't let the t-bird outshine the Mustang.
It appears that age-old fueds within Ford are still there, and still have their thumb up their butts... Otherwise, the V10 would have been pushed like no tomorrow against the Hemi. That still makes no sense. Imagine the commercial: Hookup a Dodge 2500 Hemi to 10K lbs of trailer, alongside a 3-valve (or even 2-valve) V10 w/the same trailer. Case closed.
But then, there was a reason the '89 t-bird with supercharged 3.8L V6 couldn't put out more than the 220 rated HP. The Mustang 5.0 was currently at 225 and they just couldn't let the t-bird outshine the Mustang.
It appears that age-old fueds within Ford are still there, and still have their thumb up their butts... Otherwise, the V10 would have been pushed like no tomorrow against the Hemi. That still makes no sense. Imagine the commercial: Hookup a Dodge 2500 Hemi to 10K lbs of trailer, alongside a 3-valve (or even 2-valve) V10 w/the same trailer. Case closed.
#6
04-02-2006, 11:25 AM
That is a very interesting article. Glad I do not see myself needing a diesel anytime soon.
WOW!!! Those are extreme costs associated...and my worry is not so much the average joe who wants a diesel, but the company's that use these diesels for real world WORK. If they have to pay more for the vehicle, fuel, and maintenance costs, then eventually it will trickle down to the consumer. So...in a sense...WE all will be paying more for our products.
biz
_____________________________
2003 F250 SD SC 142" XLT FX4 V10 Auto 4x4 3.73s
WOW!!! Those are extreme costs associated...and my worry is not so much the average joe who wants a diesel, but the company's that use these diesels for real world WORK. If they have to pay more for the vehicle, fuel, and maintenance costs, then eventually it will trickle down to the consumer. So...in a sense...WE all will be paying more for our products.
biz
_____________________________
2003 F250 SD SC 142" XLT FX4 V10 Auto 4x4 3.73s
#7
04-02-2006, 11:25 AM
Trending Topics
#8
04-02-2006, 01:36 PM
Don't think for a minute that the potential decrease in deisel due to cost won't affect the gassers. There will be a higher demand and higher price tags put on vehiccles that will likely decrease in capability. With all this push on the mileage, I suspect that more aerodynamic styling in the future and major weight cuts to get the mileage up to snuff.
#9
04-02-2006, 01:36 PM
Elder User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SW Iowa
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mdpopo59
I have to agree with mdpopo59. The diesels are a money thing for both Ford and the dealers. Look at how often they get to see that diesel customer back at their dealership, and expose him to Ford's new products and offerings. And anything done under warranty to that diesel is automatically paid by Fomoco. What a deal for the dealer and the tech. No accounts receivables to collect.
The only time the dealer sees his V-10 customer is for an oil change, and I'll bet most 10 customers do it themselves. $29 bucks, big deal!
The 3 valve is an awsome motor, instant power as soon as you mash the gas, no spooling up, no rattle-bang-smoke then go, no oil leaks. I think Ford probably exceeded their mandate in engine design by making such a reliable trouble free powerhouse. No one is making any money with the 3-valve V-10's except the guys buying them. What a pitty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111.
The only time the dealer sees his V-10 customer is for an oil change, and I'll bet most 10 customers do it themselves. $29 bucks, big deal!
The 3 valve is an awsome motor, instant power as soon as you mash the gas, no spooling up, no rattle-bang-smoke then go, no oil leaks. I think Ford probably exceeded their mandate in engine design by making such a reliable trouble free powerhouse. No one is making any money with the 3-valve V-10's except the guys buying them. What a pitty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111.
#11
04-02-2006, 01:48 PM
Originally Posted by 4wd
No one is making any money with the 3-valve V-10's except the guys buying them. What a pitty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111.
Not in my own experience, so far, with ony 23K miles (but at least 100K miles of air and fuel have gone through it - lots of toolin' around town, lots of WOT).
What other engine out there with such a heavy-duty service life lasts this long? Even FT engines would be wasted at less than 100K miles...
Than again, maybe that's the reason why the dealers say bad things about them. And why Ford has a distorted view of marketability of the engine.
#12
04-02-2006, 02:16 PM
Regading comparing a Hemi's pulling power to the Ford V10: The V10 is 1.1 liter larger, has more horsepower and WAY more torque than the Hemi. Poor comparison. It would also be a poor comparison to put the 5.4 against the Hemi. The Hemi would leave the 5.4 in the dust just as bad as the V10 would the Hemi. The V10 grunt under load goes without saying. Not under load, a properly geared Hemi (4.10 option as opposed to 3.73) is damn quick!
#13
04-02-2006, 02:30 PM
Elder User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: On top of a big hill...
Posts: 851
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Yet another reason to appreciate my v10 F250-as if I needed more! At 36k miles I havent had any drivetrain/engine issues at all even after putting several thousand miles of towing on it.
I just had fairly useless discussion at a GM forum with a guy who riding down Ford's gas engines. Told me he test drove a new V10 F250 and found it "barely adequate" ten turned around and bought a 2500HD 6.0L!! Gotta love it!
I just had fairly useless discussion at a GM forum with a guy who riding down Ford's gas engines. Told me he test drove a new V10 F250 and found it "barely adequate" ten turned around and bought a 2500HD 6.0L!! Gotta love it!
#14
04-02-2006, 02:55 PM
Originally Posted by schmedly
Regading comparing a Hemi's pulling power to the Ford V10: The V10 is 1.1 liter larger, has more horsepower and WAY more torque than the Hemi. Poor comparison.
Dodge doesn't have a bigger gas engine than the 5.7 for now. The 6.1 is coming in '07 ?? still, it's smaller than a 6.8L
My point was just that. Ford would have a great marketing strategy against the Hemi... Just show a V10 burning a dually's tires
#15
04-02-2006, 03:43 PM
I would be first in line to say that Ford blew the marketing of the V10 along with the out of touch dealerships and salespeople. With the EPA clamping down on the 3/4 and 1 ton trucks, I suspect the V10 will be kept for motorhomes only. I am very curious to have more info on this new V-8 that they are suposedly coming out with. If they set it up for high torque numbers and let the horsepower fall where it may, they may come alright. It won't be like the V10 but it could be leaps ahead of the 5.4.