2010-ford-4-4-liter-diesel-engine-scooped

[battyr]

Here's one for you, the new Land Rover 3.0 V6 turbo Diesel puts out 240 hp and 445 lb ft.

An Ecoboost 3.0 V6 will put out around 320 hp/320 lb ft, it has no chance of getting near that torque.

 

I know there's the problem with NOX but I'm confident manufacturers will find an economic way

around that puzzler in the next 2-3 years, they have to before the EU adopts similar NOX rules as the US.

 

Diesel torque curve

 

 

A diesel would have more torque at 2,000 rpm, but the EcoBoost has a much flatter torque curve. The EcoBoost would have more torque at below 1,500 rpm and maintains the high torque into a high rpm. Also a gas engine would be much lighter and be able to produce a lot more hp by increasing the rpm over a diesel.

Edited April 9, 2009 by battyr

[jpd80]

Diesel torque curve

 

 

A diesel would have more torque at 2,000 rpm, but the EcoBoost has a much flatter torque curve. The EcoBoost would have more torque at below 1,500 rpm and maintains the high torque into a high rpm. Also a gas engine would be much lighter and be able to produce a lot more hp by increasing the rpm over a diesel.

The new Land Rover V6 TD has virtually no lag and the 445 lb ft torque is available at 1500 rpm,

so your argument collapses right there.

 

True, it doesn't have the top end power of EB but the Jaguar version comes close with 275 hp.....

Edited April 9, 2009 by jpd80

[battyr]

The new Land Rover V6 TD has virtually no lag and the 445 lb ft torque is available at 1500 rpm,

so your argument collapses right there.

 

True, it doesn't have the top end power of EB but the Jaguar version comes close with 275 hp.....

 

Yeah, through the use of Sequential twin turbos the Land Rover diesel get an amazing high and level torque curve.

 

You have a very overbuilt engine, with a very advance turbo system, buring a very dense fuel.

[battyr]

EB will never have the torque of a diesel because diesels fuel has a higher power density than gas.

[MERKURXR4Ti]

EB will never have the torque of a diesel because diesels fuel has a higher power density than gas.

 

Higher Energy density yes. BINGO

 

Now I for one would like to know why an ecoboost is lighter than a comparable diesel

 

I see:

 

2 turbos on both

Intercooled

DI

Aluminum...vs...CGI (in some Fords in Europe) =====Lighter!

 

weird.....

Edited April 12, 2009 by MERKURXR4Ti

[battyr]

Edit Oops.

 

Higher Energy density yes. BINGO

 

Now I for one would like to know why an ecoboost is lighter than a comparable diesel

 

I see:

 

2 turbos on both

Intercooled

DI

Aluminum...vs...CGI (in some Fords in Europe) =====Lighter!

 

weird.....

 

 

EB has 11:1 compression ratio vs. 14 to 24:1 with diesel.

EB has timed spark ignition with no detonaion vs. compress ignition.

 

Diesels last because they have to be over built to withstand the stress of compression ignition. That is also why they are so expensive.

Edited April 13, 2009 by battyr

[battyr]

Gasoline engines are a lighter, cheaper engine that can deliver more power from a higher rpm range. They use many types of flexible fuels that take little effore to ignite. With the us of EB, it can produce near diesel fuel efficiency.

 

Depending on demand, gasoline can be considered a waste product of diesel fuel production.

[battyr]

Note, North America has a shortage of diesel making it more expensive. If Europe continues to switch from gas to diesel, they will have the same situation. Gasoline is only more expensive because of additional taxes on it.

 

If you want to manufacture fuel by combining Carbon with Hydrogen in a Fischer-Tropsch process, diesel fuel would require more inputs and be more expensive that gasoline.

 

Because diesels have a higher energy density, they produce more Co2 per gallon burned. Because of their use of DI, high compressionn ratio and turbos, diesels produce less Co2 than a conventional gasoline engine. I would argue that by using advanced gasoline engines like the EB, you can achieve less Co2 per gallon than a diesel, and at a cheaper price.

 

I don't have to mension the other environmental issues with Diesels.

 

EcoBoost is just the start of what can be done with gasoline engines. There are many other technology that will improve gasoline engines like Ethanol Boosting System, variable compression, etc. The secret is that gasoline engines are so cheap and flexible, that technology can be added easily.

[rscalzo]

Diesel always falls in the summer when the demand for heating oil drops down to almost zero. It will start rising late fall. Right now getting someone to buy a truck, any truck is difficult. Will they be more likely to do so with an expensive option? Not unless Ford can guarantee the mileage from the diesel will be far above the gas engine equivalent. I do see a market in the commercial arena. Our EMS rigs were all diesel and ran great for the most part. the older gas units sucked as they were always down for maintenance due to the very limited road use.

[battyr]

I see the future of diesel from it's history. It make sense for commercial vehicles and heavy trucks. Less so for consumer vehicles such as light cars.

[NaviCat]

Gasoline engines are a lighter, cheaper engine that can deliver more power from a higher rpm range. They use many types of flexible fuels that take little effore to ignite. With the us of EB, it can produce near diesel fuel efficiency.

 

Depending on demand, gasoline can be considered a waste product of diesel fuel production.

 

I think you have things a little backwards. SI (gasoline) engines can't use "many types of flexible fuels", they have to have a minimum octane rating to be able to ignite. The only commercial fuels I'm aware of are gasoline, ethanol and methanol, are there any others I'm missing here? CI engines (diesels) are capable of operating on a wider range of fuels, some of which require little or no refining. Besides conventional petroleum based diesel fuel, they can operate on kersosene, vegetable-based oils, seed-based oils, algae-derived lipids etc.

 

Gasoline is not a waste product of diesel fuel production, they are each fractions obtained from the same refining process. Part of the cost equation with diesel fuel in North America is that we are exporting a portion to Europe to satisfy their demand.

 

While the cost of a basic SI engine is definitely less than a comparable CI engine, that cost delta begins to shrink when you turn your SI engine into an "EB". You're adding the cost of two turbos, a more expensive direct injection fuel system, and additional aftertreatment similar to what's now required on a diesel (NOx traps and possibly particulate filters...).

[theoldwizard]

Note, North America has a shortage of diesel making it more expensive.

Last year's (2008) US "shortage" of diesel was partially caused by US refineries exporting low sulfur (not ultra low, just low) diesel to countries that still allow its use. There was a big demand so they got top dollar and avoided having to install the extra equipment necessary to produce ultra low sulfur diesel.

 

Worldwide demand for all fuels is down. Additionally, both India and China has very recently built new refineries, both designed with excess capacity for diesel to take advantage of the world wide demand on this fuel.

Edited April 14, 2009 by theoldwizard

[theoldwizard]

... The only commercial fuels I'm aware of are gasoline, ethanol and methanol, are there any others I'm missing here? ...

Butanol.

 

It is another member of the "alcohol" family, but is actually the most welled suited as a replacement for gasoline as a fuel in internal combustion engines because it has a higher "energy density".

 

Not as easy to make a ethanol.

[battyr]

Butanol.

 

It is another member of the "alcohol" family, but is actually the most welled suited as a replacement for gasoline as a fuel in internal combustion engines because it has a higher "energy density".

 

Not as easy to make a ethanol.

 

Any gaseous fuel like propane or natural gas will burn in a gasoline engine. Also any fuel that will evaporate at a low temperature and pressure. That is why the alcohols make such good fuel.

 

Ether works to.

[NaviCat]

Any gaseous fuel like propane or natural gas will burn in a gasoline engine. Also any fuel that will evaporate at a low temperature and pressure. That is why the alcohols make such good fuel.

 

Ether works to.

 

You're missing the point. All the fuels you mention require refining (distillation in the case of the alcohol family). This processing all takes extra energy. Petro-based diesel fuels require less refining and in the case of bio-diesel no refining is required.

 

Natural gas can also be burned in a diesel engine.

[battyr]

You're missing the point. All the fuels you mention require refining (distillation in the case of the alcohol family). This processing all takes extra energy. Petro-based diesel fuels require less refining and in the case of bio-diesel no refining is required.

 

Natural gas can also be burned in a diesel engine.

 

That is false. Diesel requires fractional distillation just like gasoline. They both start as crude oil and go through the same process. The only difference is that diesel requires to be heated to 300 degrees c. to be distilled. Gasoline only needs to be heated to 150 degrees c. As well gasoline is both lighter and thinner. It can be transported and pipelined easier. It is imposible to produce diesel from crude oil without producing gasoline first. You better have a use for the gasoline.

 

While diesel engines can burn everything from bunker sea oil to kerosene, I would not try to burn them all in the same engine. Different engines require a fuel with different flash points. Don't try to burn gasoline in a diesel engine. Don't just burn straight vegetable oil as bio-diesel. It must be process with Alcohol to remove the glycerol from the fuel. So much for reduced refining.

 

It is much more difficult to remove sulfur from diesel than form gasolne. I don't know why. It has something to do with the higher boiling temperature of diesel.

 

All diesel engines are required to have a water filter. They are much more vulnerable to dirty and wet contaminants than gas engines.

[theoldwizard]

Any gaseous fuel like propane or natural gas will burn in a gasoline engine. Also any fuel that will evaporate at a low temperature and pressure. That is why the alcohols make such good fuel.

Okay.

 

Butanol is a liquid at "standard temperature and pressure" (not to be confused with butane).

 

Any fuel that is not a liquid at standard temperature and pressure suffers from having to have a heavy tank to contain it on a vehicle and low "energy density" (BTU/lbs).

[battyr]

Okay.

 

Butanol is a liquid at "standard temperature and pressure" (not to be confused with butane).

 

Any fuel that is not a liquid at standard temperature and pressure suffers from having to have a heavy tank to contain it on a vehicle and low "energy density" (BTU/lbs).

 

Butanol and gasoline if atomized with air and put under the standard compression of a gasoline engine will become a vapour very fast.

 

Both natural gas and propane can be used in both gasoline and diesel engines so you would only use them for economic and environmental reasons.

[theoldwizard]

Butanol and gasoline if atomized with air and put under the standard compression of a gasoline engine will become a vapour very fast.

I'm not going to debate with you, but you obviously don't know much about chemistry and physics terminology.

 

It is not physically possible for a liquid that is "atomized" (broken into very small droplets) to convert to a gas when placed under pressure, everything else being equal.

 

When a liquid does turn to a gas, the volume it occupies is vastly increased. If the volume can not increase, it will not vaporize.

Edited April 17, 2009 by theoldwizard

[twintornados]

I'm not going to debate with you, but you obviously don't know much about chemistry and physics terminology.

...and you don't know jack about suspensions

[MGolden]

So can some of you insiders sum up the status of this motor? Is there a job1 scheduled for anything other than the F150? E-serie? Superduty? Expy/Navy? If not I would assume this thing is just a fading dream of mine.......

[fordmantpw]

So can some of you insiders sum up the status of this motor? Is there a job1 scheduled for anything other than the F150? E-serie? Superduty? Expy/Navy? If not I would assume this thing is just a fading dream of mine.......

 

+1...that's what I'm concerned about! :reading:

[NaviCat]

...oldwiz, I'm with you, I decided to stop "debating" battyr the other day. When the term "flexible fuels" is used anyone who has worked with diesels knows that they are far more flexible as far as the fuel types that can be utilized. That was the only point I was trying to make originally.

 

As far as the 4.4 status, its on indefinite hold which in Ford terminology means dead. If its been killed for the F-150 then its dead for all the other vehicle platforms as the remaining volumes would not justify the investment. With the human and financial resource situation currently in North America the focus is a flawless launch of the Scorpion for SuperDuty and therefore I'm sure the 4.4 was viewed as a distraction.

 

Too bad since a diesel F-150 would definitely be a more useful option than an "ecoboost" F-150....

[GMarc]

As far as the 4.4 status, its on indefinite hold which in Ford terminology means dead. If its been killed for the F-150 then its dead for all the other vehicle platforms as the remaining volumes would not justify the investment. With the human and financial resource situation currently in North America the focus is a flawless launch of the Scorpion for SuperDuty and therefore I'm sure the 4.4 was viewed as a distraction.

 

Too bad since a diesel F-150 would definitely be a more useful option than an "ecoboost" F-150....

 

Truly sad news.

[battyr]

I'm not going to debate with you, but you obviously don't know much about chemistry and physics terminology.

 

It is not physically possible for a liquid that is "atomized" (broken into very small droplets) to convert to a gas when placed under pressure, everything else being equal.

 

When a liquid does turn to a gas, the volume it occupies is vastly increased. If the volume can not increase, it will not vaporize.

 

Just to defend myself.

 

Under your understanding of chemistry and physics terminology, don't buy a gasoline engine because under the laws of physics, it will not run. Unless of course you burn the gasoline in a diesel engine. I find this a bad arguement.

 

As for the under standing of physics and chemistry, if you put pure gasoline only into an engine, you would be right. But we are not. We are putting a mixture of gasoline and air. This raises the complexity beyond my full understanding. I am not going to spend the time to fully understand the math. But I do have a greater understanding than you do.

 

This is want I understand. When you raise the pressure on air, the gasoline will evapourate to dissolve into the air. This is dependant on the matterials involved. Can be the opposite dependant on the matterial.

 

Think of watervapour. Using your under standing as water vapour, the reduction in pressure would make it impossible for clouds to form as air rises to an area of low pressure. The only clouds that you would find would be from air dropping areas of high pressure and form as low lining fog. Actually rain would be impossible.

 

Obviously this is not the case. Thanks to you I was forced to learn why this water vapour works the way it does.

 

Remember you are an engineer, not a physicist.