crs2572 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I seriously doubt Ford would go this route. I bet they are through using a third party supplier for diesel engines after the Navistar fiasco. Chrysler will pay $2 billion to its secured creditors. Its unsecured creditors, who are mainly parts suppliers and the BBDO Detroit advertising agency, may be paid more immediately in some cases but have no guarantee of any payments. Salaried employees might or might not be ordered to take two weeks off without pay. The top unsecured debtor is Ohio Module Manufacturing, a Hyundai division which supplies Jeep components, and is owed $70 million. Ad agency BBDO Detroit was at #2, with $58 million owed. Many of the top ten debtors are recognizeable to Chrysler fans - Johnson Controls (interior parts), Continental Automotive (electronics, ABS, brakes, and more), Cummins[/b], Visteon, New Process, and Denso. Also included are Comau of Michigan and Germersheim Spare Parts of Germany. If the Bankruptcy judge throws out the contract between Cummins and Chrysler, would that open the door for a possible contract between Ford and Cummins? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 If the Bankruptcy judge throws out the contract between Cummins and Chrysler, would that open the door for a possible contract between Ford and Cummins? But why? The Ford built 6.7 is nearly ready and will be going into the SD early next year. The 4.4 is on the back burner, so it isn't urgent for Ford to get a smaller diesel ready, but it sounds like they could have it ready in 18 months or less. Seems teaming up with Cummins would not be a sound business decision...maybe GM will do it. :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devodev Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I seriously doubt Ford would go this route. I bet they are through using a third party supplier for diesel engines after the Navistar fiasco. I agree but months ago I heard this rumor and didn't believe it. However it seems like there was something to the Ford-GM deal as I'm still hearing about it in other places. I thought the light-duty diesels were nearly ready to go for Ford & GM so I couldn't figure out why they were talking about doing a deal together this late in the game. Either way, both are out now (like everybody else), but we'll see if the new CAFE regs pushes things forward a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 It is looking like the new CAFE/CO2 emissions regulations will effectively prohibit diesels in any U.S. vehicle under 8,600# GVW.. I have not seen this in writing yet, but that is what I am hearing at this point. so bye bye Blue-tec, TDI and Mhlm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 But why? The Ford built 6.7 is nearly ready and will be going into the SD early next year. The 4.4 is on the back burner, so it isn't urgent for Ford to get a smaller diesel ready, but it sounds like they could have it ready in 18 months or less. Seems teaming up with Cummins would not be a sound business decision...maybe GM will do it. :shades: doesn't Ford own part of Cummins? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I agree but months ago I heard this rumor and didn't believe it. However it seems like there was something to the Ford-GM deal as I'm still hearing about it in other places. I thought the light-duty diesels were nearly ready to go for Ford & GM so I couldn't figure out why they were talking about doing a deal together this late in the game. Either way, both are out now (like everybody else), but we'll see if the new CAFE regs pushes things forward a bit. That was an April Fool's Joke on pickuptrucks.com. doesn't Ford own part of Cummins? No, but they do own part of Cummings! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribunius Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 It is looking like the new CAFE/CO2 emissions regulations will effectively prohibit diesels in any U.S. vehicle under 8,600# GVW.. I have not seen this in writing yet, but that is what I am hearing at this point. Thats not entirely true. It will just make diesel engined vehicles more expensive than they already are. That will put some buyers off but not all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 It is looking like the new CAFE/CO2 emissions regulations will effectively prohibit diesels in any U.S. vehicle under 8,600# GVW.. I have not seen this in writing yet, but that is what I am hearing at this point. What am I missing? Diesels are more fuel efficient and produce less CO2. I would think CAFE would justify the cost of a diesel. Canada will be limiting CO2 produced by cars and not just MPG based limits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaviCat Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 QUOTE (Deanh @ May 20 2009, 01:55 PM) doesn't Ford own part of Cummins? {No, but they do own part of Cummings! } NO, Ford used to own 10% but sold their stake in CUMMINS in the mid-90's when they got out of the heavy truck business. And YES, the G in Cummins is silent. {It is looking like the new CAFE/CO2 emissions regulations will effectively prohibit diesels in any U.S. vehicle under 8,600# GVW.. I have not seen this in writing yet, but that is what I am hearing at this point.} Acutally you have it backwards: diesels should be part of the solution in meeting the new regs as they HELP fuel economy and hence reduce CO2 output. That is if the new regs don't continue to ratchet NOx limits down to the point where even Bluetec technology can't make diesels viable... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 QUOTE (Deanh @ May 20 2009, 01:55 PM) doesn't Ford own part of Cummins? {No, but they do own part of Cummings! } NO, Ford used to own 10% but sold their stake in CUMMINS in the mid-90's when they got out of the heavy truck business. And YES, the G in Cummins is silent. {It is looking like the new CAFE/CO2 emissions regulations will effectively prohibit diesels in any U.S. vehicle under 8,600# GVW.. I have not seen this in writing yet, but that is what I am hearing at this point.} Acutally you have it backwards: diesels should be part of the solution in meeting the new regs as they HELP fuel economy and hence reduce CO2 output. That is if the new regs don't continue to ratchet NOx limits down to the point where even Bluetec technology can't make diesels viable... not sure I agree, witness the LOUSY fuel consumption of the 6.4 compared with the redoubtable 7.3....diesel Mpgs suffer just as much if not more when burdened with feeble cleansing techniques and mandated add ons.....AND the expense is ludicrous to boot....I think there are better alternatives.....I know where my dollar would go if I had the choice of a diesel or gas engine that got relatively comparable mileage.....even for the same $....and may I point out the WONDERFULL VW TDI has been surpassed SUBSTANTIALLY ( in REAL world driving ) by the fusion hybrid ( granted the Fusion is a couple of thousand more....but wouldn't take long to recoup that would it, especially given the Govts propensity to beleive diesel should cost more than petrol ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 {No, but they do own part of Cummings! } NO, Ford used to own 10% but sold their stake in CUMMINS in the mid-90's when they got out of the heavy truck business. And YES, the G in Cummins is silent. I know, I was playing with the rumor of Ford owning Cummins that has gone around 100 times, along with the misspelling. Oh, and by the way...there is no G in Cummins, so it can't be silent! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 What am I missing? Diesels are more fuel efficient and produce less CO2. I would think CAFE would justify the cost of a diesel. Diesel are very dirty in other ways...they also produce alot of soot You can't have your cake and eat it too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMarc Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 WOW! People like you still roam the earth. UNBELIEVABLE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaviCat Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 Diesel are very dirty in other ways...they also produce alot of soot You can't have your cake and eat it too In case you haven't been paying attention, since 2007 both light duty and heavy duty diesels have been mandated to have particulate filters installed in the exhaust....effectively tailpipe soot is reduced to zero. Diesels have to meet the same emissions standards as gas engines, both under and over 8500 lbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 In case you haven't been paying attention, since 2007 both light duty and heavy duty diesels have been mandated to have particulate filters installed in the exhaust....effectively tailpipe soot is reduced to zero. Diesels have to meet the same emissions standards as gas engines, both under and over 8500 lbs So does the new Obama Cafe/Co2 standard change anything relating to diesel emissions? Or is it just from the 2007 regs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devodev Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 That was an April Fool's Joke on pickuptrucks.com. Right! I remember the April Fool's joke. But what made it so good was that before April 1st, the Ford/GM rumor was flying out there (which is what made it a good joke). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribunius Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 So does the new Obama Cafe/Co2 standard change anything relating to diesel emissions? Or is it just from the 2007 regs. The new regulations make things a lot tougher for diesel engine manufacturers. They mandate an 83% reduction in nox emissions. Particulate mater stays the same. With the addition of a bluetec/def (whatever you want to call it) nox can be significantly reduced and they can back off a bit with the egr system. What this adds up to is increased milage but also an extra cost for the def. Also the initial buy in cost will be high. So in the long run the increased milage will offset the cost of def but the lenght of time to make up the difference in initial cost will probably be longer at least initially. Though have said that the difference between an ecoboost gas engine and one of the new diesel engines might not be too much considering the increased cost of an ecoboost engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 Though have said that the difference between an ecoboost gas engine and one of the new diesel engines might not be too much considering the increased cost of an ecoboost engine. I have a hard time believing that a Diesel engine would cost the same as an Ecoboost engine. From Ford's press releases it only adds something like $700 to the overall cost of the engine. Its MUCH harder and expensive to design an engine to survive a 1:20 compression ratio (Diesel) vs a 13:1 (or whatever the Ecoboost is rated at) gas engine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribunius Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 I have a hard time believing that a Diesel engine would cost the same as an Ecoboost engine. From Ford's press releases it only adds something like $700 to the overall cost of the engine. Its MUCH harder and expensive to design an engine to survive a 1:20 compression ratio (Diesel) vs a 13:1 (or whatever the Ecoboost is rated at) gas engine I never said it would cost as much. What I was going for was that both engines are going up in price so the added cost of the new emissions equipment for diesel engines will be some what off set by the increase for a gas engine. All in all the current price difference between a diesel and a gas engine will remain roughly the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribunius Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 It´s a real priceadvantage for diesel these days. http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_dcus_nus_w.htm says he price of petrol is up 37 cents/gallon from 20th of April but diesel is up just 5 cents. 10% difference in just a month. Stay tuned. When a 20% difference is steady over a period the 4.4-litre might be on the market. So; Tribunius seems wrong with the prediction:"All in all the current price difference between a diesel and a gas engine will remain roughly the same. " I was talking about the actual cost of the engine and not the fuel that goes into it. eg a diesel on a new f-250 is a $6895 option over the standard 5.4L gas engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribunius Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 Sorry. I didn´t see that. No worries man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crs2572 Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 F-150 diesel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 F-150 diesel Jalopnik is making some strange assumptions with the 4.4 diesel, saying that it will have only 450 lb ft of torque when its little brother, the 3.6 already makes 472 lb ft. My estimation is that the 4.4 will have roughly 320 hp and 550 lb ft of torque, more than enough to displace the larger gasoline engines on offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) F-150 diesel That story is from July 2008 ! The 4.4L is firmly on the back burner. It is clearly a case where the marketing people don't want the 4.4L "competing" with the 3.7L and 5.0L gasoline engines. Also, iIt was also a big cost save for engineering as they moved all of the resources on that program on to the Scorpion or back to gasoline. Some day ... maybe ! Edited October 31, 2009 by theoldwizard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) That story is from July 2008 ! Wiz....are you sure? If the story and pictures are from 2008, there would be no way Ford would have let the then unrevealed 2009 F150 be caught without any camo..... Edited October 31, 2009 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.