4 ms·

>If one doesn’t like these trade-offs, look into technologies that don’t require them like hydrogen or electric. [...] just personal financial ones like range,

by jasode 2y ago

>If one doesn’t like these trade-offs, look into technologies that don’t require them like hydrogen or electric. [...] just personal financial ones like range, weight and charge/fuel supply. It's not just personal/financial. It's also raw capability of a diesel truck to get the particular type of jobs done. A lot of the shops did the deletes on trucks that can tow 12000+ lbs. Think of trucks like Ford F-250, F-350, and beyond etc, towing landscaping equipment like a 10000 lb skidsteer on a 14000-lbs-rated trailer. Or hotshot truckers carrying random loads. Some non-commercial trucks (smaller than class 4) can tow up to 40000 lbs. The Rivian and Cyber trucks only have max tow capacity up to 11000 to 12000 lbs. There isn't a comparable hydrogen/electric substitute that can do what the diesel pickup trucks can do. In contrast, there are realistic EV substitutes for diesel cars. Those diesel delete shops were typically modifying high-towing-capacity trucks and not the smaller Volkswagon diesel passenger cars. Some truck owners were justifying the deletes because they believe the EGR/DPF/DEF was flawed and would lead to a ticking time bomb of expensive engine repairs down the road. (Cue up a bunch of anecdotes of how the "old diesel engines were reliable and bulletproof" compared to the "new diesel engines with all that EPA emissions crap requiring out-of-warranty repairs" ) I don't know enough about the engineering to know if they're correct or blowing it all out of proportion.

arghwhat 2y ago
> It's not just personal/financial. It's also raw capability of a diesel truck to get the particular type of jobs done. What I was saying is not that electric solved all problems yet, but that messing with electric and trade-offs in decisions there only really affect you. Messing with a diesel, the trade-offs affect everyone around you - a bit a power paid by everyone else's cancer risk and deteriorating environment. That's not a decision you should be allowed to make for moral reasons. With DPF/cat, you do have a risk for expensive service: If you completely neglect it, intentionally run a very sooty tune and never do the (usually automatic) cleaning cycle. At that point, it'll clog up, break, and need to be replaced. But that's easy to avoid, and not something that ups your service interval either. You would also get extremely expensive repairs if you don't change and monitor engine oil, but no trucker would consider it a big deal. That Rivian only tows 5.5 tons is probably just a matter of demand. Even if it has its uses, I imagine the actual demand for towing 20 tons on personal vehicle is quite low. It could also be that they deemed that the battery range would be too silly at these loads, which is luckily an area of with quite rapid improvement these days - battery range has come a long way. Also note that you definitely don't need to mess with emissions to tow 20 tons. Messing with EGR grants you zero additional power. Removing DPF and catalytic converter can give you a little bit, but not enough to go from being unable to tow 20 tons to being able, and if you need to tow 20 tons you should start out by buying a truck rated to tow 20 tons as more engine power is not enough to do that safely. > A lot of the shops did the deletes on trucks that can tow Don't trust the sales pitch from the tuning shops that sell the mods. > Cue up a bunch of anecdotes of how the "old diesel engines were reliable and bulletproof" Heh, those statements are not entirely false, but they forget important details. Some of the engines old-timers might be fondly remembering as indestructible have dual digit HP ratings, at the size and fuel consumption of something rated in the hundreds of HP today. It's not hard to build an indestructible engine if you don't have to care about size, weight, fuel efficiency, power or responsiveness.
- MarkMarine 2y ago
  A gas engine could certainly tow my race trailer, but at horrific mpg. I have a gas truck (gets a very nice 22mpg on the highway, which was 2mpg off my wife's RAV4 that seemed like it was powered by hamsters running on a wheel) and towing my trailer it got 3-5mpg. 3 to 5. My diesel gets 12mpg. EGR "messing with" does affect power. EGR lowers combustion temps, and the thermodynamic work the engine is producing is directly affected by the temperature gradient between the combustion chamber and the outside air. Lower temp == lower efficiency. Does cut down on NOx, but let's at least be honest about the negatives. My point is more like this: EGR seems to help with two things, 1. fixes the NOx problem (ok that is legitimate) 2. Injects soot into the engine's intake, covering everything in coke, but at a slow enough rate that they don't fail during the warranty period. Helps with planned obsolescence, considering how everything is made cheaper and crappier now, on purpose so you have to throw it away and buy a new one, no one is going to convince me that #2 isn't a net positive to the OEMs, and it also giving them a darn good reason not to search for other methods to reduce NOx emissions in a way that doesn't help the engines expire more quickly. Like I said, I did not delete my truck, nor would I. I care about the environment and the air we all breathe. But I don't buy that there aren't other ways to solve these issues.
  - arghwhat 2y ago
    > A gas engine could certainly tow my race trailer, but at horrific mpg Gasoline engines actually have their highest fuel-to-power efficiency at full throttle. A more powerful engine just allows you to burn even more fuel to accelerate faster. I suspect that the gas trucks gear ratios just made it unsuitable for towing by putting you way outside the optimum power band at load. This is why I said that power is not the only factor: You need a chassis, brakes, gear ratios and possibly transmission cooling for suited for towing that heavy loads. I stretched a chassis once towing way over the rating - I recommend not doing that. 22 MPG is also pretty bad by today's standards, but I've had engines like that. At 12mpg you're getting very close to the fuel consumption of the compact 48 ton trucks we use in the EU, but they usually have almost 800 HP under the... seat. > EGR "messing with" does affect power. EGR lowers combustion temps .. but let's at least be honest about the negatives. Temporarily, at idle, it does lower efficiency yes. But it's during the phase of engine operation with the lowest possible fuel consumption, and while all the fuel you're burning is thrown out the window. It is also only fully open in a very specific scenario, and otherwise at idle or very low power demand it will only be slightly open. I don't think the cooled cylinder is harmful - it would eventually cool that that temperature at idle even without the EGR, and a hot cylinder preheats gasses on the way in, reducing the possible temperature gradient. > But I don't buy that there aren't other ways to solve these issues. As mentioned in a different comment, the EGR efficiency concern is entirely gone with engine start-stop as the time when it would be fully open is replaced by the engine being off. That improves fuel consumption past a deleted truck. I agree that emissions-related tech is a hack in many ways, but the problem is that internal combustion engines are terrible and hard to fix. For most people, electric already works fine, and most complaining about spec comparisons never need those specs. For others, older technology will stick around for a bit longer until we have mature solutions. Plus, if all regular cars and trucks get replaced by something better, having a few (properly emissions controlled) gas trucks on the road won't matter as much.

by jasode 2y ago

arghwhat 2y ago

> It's not just personal/financial. It's also raw capability of a diesel truck to get the particular type of jobs done. What I was saying is not that electric solved all problems yet, but that messing with electric and trade-offs in decisions there only really affect you. Messing with a diesel, the trade-offs affect everyone around you - a bit a power paid by everyone else's cancer risk and deteriorating environment. That's not a decision you should be allowed to make for moral reasons. With DPF/cat, you do have a risk for expensive service: If you completely neglect it, intentionally run a very sooty tune and never do the (usually automatic) cleaning cycle. At that point, it'll clog up, break, and need to be replaced. But that's easy to avoid, and not something that ups your service interval either. You would also get extremely expensive repairs if you don't change and monitor engine oil, but no trucker would consider it a big deal. That Rivian only tows 5.5 tons is probably just a matter of demand. Even if it has its uses, I imagine the actual demand for towing 20 tons on personal vehicle is quite low. It could also be that they deemed that the battery range would be too silly at these loads, which is luckily an area of with quite rapid improvement these days - battery range has come a long way. Also note that you definitely don't need to mess with emissions to tow 20 tons. Messing with EGR grants you zero additional power. Removing DPF and catalytic converter can give you a little bit, but not enough to go from being unable to tow 20 tons to being able, and if you need to tow 20 tons you should start out by buying a truck rated to tow 20 tons as more engine power is not enough to do that safely. > A lot of the shops did the deletes on trucks that can tow Don't trust the sales pitch from the tuning shops that sell the mods. > Cue up a bunch of anecdotes of how the "old diesel engines were reliable and bulletproof" Heh, those statements are not entirely false, but they forget important details. Some of the engines old-timers might be fondly remembering as indestructible have dual digit HP ratings, at the size and fuel consumption of something rated in the hundreds of HP today. It's not hard to build an indestructible engine if you don't have to care about size, weight, fuel efficiency, power or responsiveness.

MarkMarine 2y ago
A gas engine could certainly tow my race trailer, but at horrific mpg. I have a gas truck (gets a very nice 22mpg on the highway, which was 2mpg off my wife's RAV4 that seemed like it was powered by hamsters running on a wheel) and towing my trailer it got 3-5mpg. 3 to 5. My diesel gets 12mpg. EGR "messing with" does affect power. EGR lowers combustion temps, and the thermodynamic work the engine is producing is directly affected by the temperature gradient between the combustion chamber and the outside air. Lower temp == lower efficiency. Does cut down on NOx, but let's at least be honest about the negatives. My point is more like this: EGR seems to help with two things, 1. fixes the NOx problem (ok that is legitimate) 2. Injects soot into the engine's intake, covering everything in coke, but at a slow enough rate that they don't fail during the warranty period. Helps with planned obsolescence, considering how everything is made cheaper and crappier now, on purpose so you have to throw it away and buy a new one, no one is going to convince me that #2 isn't a net positive to the OEMs, and it also giving them a darn good reason not to search for other methods to reduce NOx emissions in a way that doesn't help the engines expire more quickly. Like I said, I did not delete my truck, nor would I. I care about the environment and the air we all breathe. But I don't buy that there aren't other ways to solve these issues.
- arghwhat 2y ago
  > A gas engine could certainly tow my race trailer, but at horrific mpg Gasoline engines actually have their highest fuel-to-power efficiency at full throttle. A more powerful engine just allows you to burn even more fuel to accelerate faster. I suspect that the gas trucks gear ratios just made it unsuitable for towing by putting you way outside the optimum power band at load. This is why I said that power is not the only factor: You need a chassis, brakes, gear ratios and possibly transmission cooling for suited for towing that heavy loads. I stretched a chassis once towing way over the rating - I recommend not doing that. 22 MPG is also pretty bad by today's standards, but I've had engines like that. At 12mpg you're getting very close to the fuel consumption of the compact 48 ton trucks we use in the EU, but they usually have almost 800 HP under the... seat. > EGR "messing with" does affect power. EGR lowers combustion temps .. but let's at least be honest about the negatives. Temporarily, at idle, it does lower efficiency yes. But it's during the phase of engine operation with the lowest possible fuel consumption, and while all the fuel you're burning is thrown out the window. It is also only fully open in a very specific scenario, and otherwise at idle or very low power demand it will only be slightly open. I don't think the cooled cylinder is harmful - it would eventually cool that that temperature at idle even without the EGR, and a hot cylinder preheats gasses on the way in, reducing the possible temperature gradient. > But I don't buy that there aren't other ways to solve these issues. As mentioned in a different comment, the EGR efficiency concern is entirely gone with engine start-stop as the time when it would be fully open is replaced by the engine being off. That improves fuel consumption past a deleted truck. I agree that emissions-related tech is a hack in many ways, but the problem is that internal combustion engines are terrible and hard to fix. For most people, electric already works fine, and most complaining about spec comparisons never need those specs. For others, older technology will stick around for a bit longer until we have mature solutions. Plus, if all regular cars and trucks get replaced by something better, having a few (properly emissions controlled) gas trucks on the road won't matter as much.