diesels please!

[Bishop]

so when we do get diesels would it just be standard or would there be a possibility for 2 strokes like detroits?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnN1i9LjAw0

[FordManFromHell]

sc90@. Even though I dont particulary enjoy diesels, I still would like them in the game. Its like even though I think live rear axel is inferior when compared to independent suspension, id still be very dissappointed if there werent any live rear axels in the game. Yes while I do understand that there are still demand for live rear axel, its just not an ideal solution for a road going car.

So yeah, of course there should be diesels in the game! So take it easy, im on your side

[Kev2442]

As a French, I do know what Diesel is.
I heard some good things about it also :
- NoX are greatly reduced by particle filters, so it's in the end less harmful than petrols,
- the octane limit is avoided, so we can then have greater turbo boost,
- just have a look at the Audi R8 V10 TDI : powerful, great sound for a diesel and cheaper fuel than any other supercar, isn't it ?

[nouky]

As a French, I do know what Diesel is.
I heard some good things about it also :
- NoX are greatly reduced by particle filters, so it's in the end less harmful than petrols,
- the octane limit is avoided, so we can then have greater turbo boost,
- just have a look at the Audi R8 V10 TDI : powerful, great sound for a diesel and cheaper fuel than any other supercar, isn't it ?

Alors mon cher,
-les nox n'existe pas sur essence et le FAP ne marche que chaud donc apres 20Km
-pas d'octane c'est de l'huile et un moteur a combustion et non explosion, aucun raport
-on parle de voitures la.

[Kev2442]

Well it seems my memory failed, haha.
I still want to explain with other words, as it seems it has been uncorrect and uncorrectly understood.
- With NoX, I meant that with particle filters, it finally emmit less nocive particles (less CO2, and not that much NoX). And I didn't know for the 20 km heating. Still nothing in a car's life.
- I know there's no octane with diesel, but petrol octane was a limit in turbo boost. Source ? A special episode of American Muscle Car about modern supercars. I think it was said by Lingenfelter, Callaway or Saleen.
- And with the R8, I'm talking about cars, as it is not the LMP1, but the supercar. It has 4 wheels, an engine, and a license plate. Guess it's effectively a car, isn't it ?

[nouky]

Well it seems my memory failed, haha.
I still want to explain with other words, as it seems it has been uncorrect and uncorrectly understood.
- With NoX, I meant that with particle filters, it finally emmit less nocive particles (less CO2, and not that much NoX). And I didn't know for the 20 km heating. Still nothing in a car's life.
- I know there's no octane with diesel, but petrol octane was a limit in turbo boost. Source ? A special episode of American Muscle Car about modern supercars. I think it was said by Lingenfelter, Callaway or Saleen.
- And with the R8, I'm talking about cars, as it is not the LMP1, but the supercar. It has 4 wheels, an engine, and a license plate. Guess it's effectively a car, isn't it ?

-20km each trip, count in all city cars that won"t do the distance before stopping for a moment.
-Octane is a limit to boost mainly because USA have 91 octane as pump gas, we have 95 and 98, not counting E85 addition, the difference is dramatic in usuable boost pressure.
-4 wheels, an engine, and a license plate, tractors do too, a 2Cv does too, a quad does too, aso...

[flatchicken]

There are no petrol engines in tractors or trucks simply because of the fuel economy, and also partly because of the longer lifespan diesels has vs petrol. Both engines (petrol and diesel) are surely capable of producing enough torque for the truck and for the tractor, its just that the diesel is more economical to use than the petrol, its simple as that. But since like for instance tractors and cars are completely different beasts, if some solution (diesel) is overwhelmingly better solution for tractor, it does not mean that the same solution (diesel) would necessarily also be overwhelmingly better solution also for the car.

Commercial trucks usually drive with light loads on the engine, where diesels are most effective. There's no throttle body, since power is adjusted by the amount of diesel being injected into cylinders. When petrol engine is being used for 10-20%, throttle body valve is only lightly opened and therefore huge pumping losses are generated.

Obviously petrol engine manufacturers are trying to get around this. Like for an example Honda uses variable valve timing (new i-VTEC petrols) where during low loads (under 3500rpm in my 9Gen Civic) one intake valve stays closed, so throttle body valve can be opened a quite a lot more and pumping losses are somewhat eliminated.

Longer lifespan? Well that's debatable... If service intervals are thoroughly followed then the lifespan should be about the same. One advantage diesel engines have, is that unline with petrol, diesel doesn't wash down oil film from cylinder walls so lubrication is can be better even if engine oil is long overdue.
Obviously diesel engines are very susceptible to low quality diesel fuel, especially the new ones with high pressure, common-rail fuel systems.

Oh and way before you were talking about 1.0ecoboost engine and it's winning of Engine of the Year 2012 award. Well the reliability is not taken in the account here, since this award is based on votes of, none other than journalists. And from what I understand, most of them are not engineers or mechanics, and even if they were, the engine was not widely available to public at that time so no reliability data could be gathered. I'm not bad talking the engine, it could be really good and there's a lot of new and impressive technology used there. However would I buy it in a car they sell it in? Fiesta? Yes. Focus? Maybe... But they want to put it also in Mondeo, and that is just plain wrong.

And there was also a mention of previous engine of the year winner, VW group designed 1.4TSI. But the model that won this award was a 1.4 TSI Twincharger model, which had both supercharger for low rpm which disengaged via electronically controlled clutch and from here onwards to redline only turbo was used, which was already spooled up. It wasn't a new idea and it definitely wasn't cheap (that's why it was discontinued later on), but reliability was good with this engine.
Bad reliability was to be had with 1.2TSI and 1.4TSI (turbo only). What was the problem, well the cam-chain manufacturing was subcontracted and according to VW low quality tools were used and then people experienced cam-chain skipping in many instances under 80000km. This problem was supposed to be alleviated to some extend by shortened oil change intervals (cam chain tensioners were using engine oil to provide tension)
Why did I mention this is because someone said that manufacturers would dare to release something unreliable and risk their reputation. Well VW did... Not to mention the 3cyllinder VW 1.2HTP engine with reliability issues, VW 2.5TDI V6 with problems, VW 2.0 TDI (early PD ones) with heads cracking...

[FordManFromHell]

Longer lifespan?

Well, that diesels longer lifespan might be just a myth built by an seriously underpowered (super low tuning level) Mercedes naturally aspirated diesel engines from the 80's, which still work after million km. Yeah, I do realize that modern diesels do not get to those kinds of km, but anyhow, you get the picture.

About Engine Awards and Ecoboost, yeah they probably don’t consider reliability as a factor at the awards, but the point is that it really does not prove that -because of this-, the winning engines could be considered as unreliable engines. Correct me if im wrong, but I don’t think that there has ever been a such a scenario where the Engine Of The Year -award winner would have later on proved on to be a massively unreliable engine. Just saying..

[flatchicken]

Longer lifespan?

Well, that diesels longer lifespan might be just a myth built by an seriously underpowered (super low tuning level) Mercedes naturally aspirated diesel engines from the 80's, which still work after million km. Yeah, I do realize that modern diesels do not get to those kinds of km, but anyhow, you get the picture.

About Engine Awards and Ecoboost, yeah they probably don’t consider reliability as a factor at the awards, but the point is that it really does not prove that -because of this-, the winning engines could be considered as unreliable engines. Correct me if im wrong, but I don’t think that there has ever been a such a scenario where the Engine Of The Year -award winner would have later on proved on to be a massively unreliable engine. Just saying..

I'm didn't say that the new 1.0Ecoboost will be unreliable, or that winning engine of the year automatic means that engine will be plagued with issues. Also it doesn't mean that the engine will outlive nice old, massively over-engineered Mercedes diesels... probably nothing will last longer than those

Maybe the "myth" comes from people using their diesels correctly - for long journeys, and not for loads of short drives around town where engine barely gets enough time to warm up.

[darkjedi]

i have seen quite a few petrols and diesels with over 350.000 km. All petrols except BMW ones I have seen have had piston rings replaced, this is a common replacement on high mileage petrols, some of them had lubrication problems and all were using moderate amounts of oil. this is only the wear side of the story , there is another one, but it has more to do with bad maintanance than wear. all diesels with high mileage i've seen were sounding "loose" ( one in particular had about 550.000km and I also checked an older 525d that me and the owner were stunned to discover it had: 1.087.000 km, WOW! it ran well,but had difficulty starting) , but they were working quite fine and no main components were changed , not even injectors.
this is because they are build to withstand much higher stresses and generally operate at lower rpms. diesel fuel also has mild lubricating properties.
Most engines are built quite well so they will run for long periods, but wear seems to occur faster on petrols. make no mistake, diesels that are poorly mantained will also suffer a lot, even more than petrols in some cases. when it comes to costs of repair and maintanance , diesels are far more expensive.
The 1.4 tsi is prone to piston failiure when operating at high power in hot enviroments (summer for example) this was the case of early 1.4 units. i do not know if they were improved or not.

There were engines that IMO were better than ones chosen for IEOFTY. These prizes seem to be given for inovation especialy.

The 2.5 tdi engine that was mentioned is a quite solid unit. the problems came from poorly manufactured sensors and injector units. God knows why bosch are making them like that.

[FordManFromHell]

I did not claim that you said anything, I just made my point about engine award stuff, so lets just take it easy

massively over-engineered Mercedes diesels... probably nothing will last longer than those

"Massively over-engineered" 2 litre SOHC with 60 hp and 112Nm

But yeah they can make some insane km, slowly but steadily.

[Hitperson]

Shame that the possible inclusion of diesels would be separate, an interesting fact i picked up relatively recently was that the Peugeot 205 T16 uses a 1.9 litre block taken from one of their diesel engines.

[pyrlix]

You know that the Petrol Engine differs from the Diesel Engine? You have to make a seperate diesel designer, because the physics from a diesel engine are a bit different.
Petrol Engines can rev to some ten-thousands of RPM, Diesel can't because of the laws of physics.

Greetz
Pyrlix

[Raticon]

I could throw in my 5 cents about the GM diesel here, as i have a Oldsmobile Delta 88 with (formerly) the 5.7L DX engine sitting around in a garage, waiting for me to lift in... Another 5.7L DX as i had it lying around.

GM had some serious issues in the '70s with the oil-crisis and all that, they were also very short on money and simply didn't have the time or dollars to spare to make a truly fuel efficient engine as sales of gas-guzzlers dropped trough the floor... So they start making their very own 5.7L (350 cu.in) diesel roughly in the same manner as they would do a gasoline engine, but saying that the 5.7L Diesel is the same engine as any other 5.7L gasoline engine with different heads is not knowing what he/she is talking about. Unfortunately, as they hardly knew what they were doing when they designed that engine, used sub-par bolts and materials for the job and finally, selling the cars with these engines to a population used to see diesels on large trucks and trains was a recipe for disaster. head olts snapped, water got into the tank and ruined the engine, people drove the cars for too short distances and never realized they had to change oil every 5000km's... Disaster, courtroom settlement and then they tossed the engine out to the dustheap of history, but keeping them on their light trucks and vans... That's why you never see any old american car with a diesel, GM ruined the diesels reputation in the US forever.

But handled allright by a driver who knows what he or she is doing, it can last forever. Mine didn't., though... But that's another story

Diesels in this game? Oh yeah. Finally a chanche to make a real, american V8-diesel like it should have been done!
But better late than never, right? so let's have patience and enjoy some gasoline during the time we wait.

[darkjedi]

America did start to buy more diesels in the 2000s , mainly large pickup trucks and european saloons, the problem is american diesel fuel is of a very bad quality; engines do not produce the stated power, are sluggish and use more fuel than normal.