New Light & Medium Duty News

[7Mary3]

2 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

I thought the diesel ban in CA and Oregon was  effective in '25??

 

It's not a diesel ban, it's the next round of more stringent diesel emissions regulations.  If I am not mistaken, I think the 2025 CARB standards will be adopted by the EPA nationwide in 2027.

 

Since the 2025 650 and 750 go on sale 1st. quarter of 2024 I believe they still have to meet 2025 emissions standards.  Wonder why Ford is starting the 2025MY so early for the 650 and 750 when they can sell the current diesels in California until Dec. 31 2024.  Does not make any sense.    

 

Cummins seems to have the technology to meet the new standards, even though they will have a gasoline version of the 6.7L on the market next year.  I wonder if GM and Navistar will be able to certify the Duramax for the JV medium duty for 2025.    

Edited November 15, 2023 by 7Mary3

[lfeg]

Another oddball sighting - a Ford Cargo with a grain body.

 

[7Mary3]

I wonder if the 2025 MY 650/750 diesel sales ban in California will include the other CARB states.

[GearheadGrrrl]

Sounds like some are, here in Minnesota I've seen no attempt to.

[Bob Rosadini]

8 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

I wonder if the 2025 MY 650/750 diesel sales ban in California will include the other CARB states.

When you refer to it as.."650/750 diesel sales ban" I thought it was a class 6/7 diesel sales ban??  Not specific to the 6.7

[7Mary3]

56 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

When you refer to it as.."650/750 diesel sales ban" I thought it was a class 6/7 diesel sales ban??  Not specific to the 6.7

 

It appears to be specific engines that can't meet the 2025 CARB regulations.  For example, It looks like the Cummins 6.7L will meet the 2025 standard while the Isuzu 4HK1 does not.  This is the first I have heard that the 6.7L Powerstroke may not meet the regulations, assuming that is the reason Ford isn't selling the 650/750 in California for 2025.  The 450/550/600 is another question, but if those trucks will be 2024 MY until the end of the calender year I would think they would continue to be available in CARB states at least until 2025.  Maybe Ford will eventually come up with an update for the 6.7L Powerstroke to meet 2025 CARB requirements, again assuming that is the reason the engine will not be offered in California.      

[silvrsvt]

27 minutes ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

It appears to be specific engines that can't meet the 2025 CARB regulations.  For example, It looks like the Cummins 6.7L will meet the 2025 standard while the Isuzu 4HK1 does not.  This is the first I have heard that the 6.7L Powerstroke may not meet the regulations, assuming that is the reason Ford isn't selling the 650/750 in California for 2025.  The 450/550/600 is another question, but if those trucks will be 2024 MY until the end of the calender year I would think they would continue to be available in CARB states at least until 2025.  Maybe Ford will eventually come up with an update for the 6.7L Powerstroke to meet 2025 CARB requirements, again assuming that is the reason the engine will not be offered in California.      

 

From what I can see the Ban is on pre-2010 engines starting this year. 

 

 

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/advanced-clean-fleets-regulation-drayage-truck-requirements#:~:text=Beginning in 2025%2C non-zero,be removed from the system.

Removing Combustion-Powered Drayage Trucks from Service

• Non-zero-emission drayage trucks in the CARB Online System, with a 2010 or newer model year engine AND that visit a seaport or intermodal railyard at least once in a year, would remain in the system until the earlier of 18 years or 800,000 miles, or a minimum of 13 years if the drayage truck has over 800,000 miles.

• Beginning in 2025, non-zero-emission trucks will be removed from the CARB Online System if they did not meet the annual visit requirement, OR if they have exceeded their minimum useful life requirements.

• On January 1, 2035, all non-zero-emission drayage trucks will be removed from the system.

• Foreign drayage trucks operating in California are not exempt from these requirements and will also be fully transitioned to zero-emission technology by 2035. The phase-in timeline requirements for drayage trucks will allow legacy drayage trucks to continue providing services until infrastructure is built that will support cross-border drayage activities. Foreign drayage trucks were also not exempt from previous Drayage Truck Regulation requirements.

[GearheadGrrrl]

Here's the new standards (I think): https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.php#lownox Not exactly simple...

[7Mary3]

3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

From what I can see the Ban is on pre-2010 engines starting this year. 

 

 

 

 

That covers drayage trucks, the trucks used at ports that generally speaking do not leave port areas.  Port areas have particularly bad air quality due to diesel ships that run constantly while in port (burning bunker oil).  There is a big push to electrify drayage trucks, which is feasable given they don't go very far and are always close to recharging facilities.

Edited November 16, 2023 by 7Mary3

[7Mary3]

2 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Here's the new standards (I think): https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.php#lownox Not exactly simple...

 

That's it.  

Edited November 16, 2023 by 7Mary3

[GearheadGrrrl]

6 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

That covers drayage trucks, the trucks used at ports that generally speaking do not leave port areas.  Port areas have particularly bad air quality due to diesel ships that run constantly while in port (burning bunker oil).  There is a big push to electrify drayage trucks, which is feasable given they don't go very far and are always close to recharging facilities.

Sounds like they're "end of lifing" the existing diesel tractors which are mostly used trucks bought for $10-20K and forcing replacement with new EV trucks costing $400-600K that the truckers can't afford. That's very disruptive and probably explains why BHSF railroad is building huge industrial parks near Barstow and Phoenix. 

[Bob Rosadini]

10 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Here's the new standards (I think): https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.php#lownox Not exactly simple...

Anyone care to guess the cost to just formulate these regs? Assuming significant testing was done to support/validate these regs.  

 

Imagine India and China will be duplicating these regs?

[GearheadGrrrl]

Would be nice if they could agree on just one set of regs!

[silvrsvt]

4 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Anyone care to guess the cost to just formulate these regs? Assuming significant testing was done to support/validate these regs.  

 

1 hour ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Would be nice if they could agree on just one set of regs!

 

What it boils down to is the US government/EPA sets one requirement and by law, California can set requirements that exceed those requirements. 

 

But that also begs this question-how can a state that has outsized influence over the country place a requirement that would affect the other 49 states? I know something like 14-17 other states use CARB in some shape, but if a company sued and it went to the Supreme Court (which I'm going to assume this already happened too), but it makes an interesting constitutional powers case. Which is the States can set laws that are not already set by the Federal government. 

[GearheadGrrrl]

Not just California vs. US, Euro emissions standards have become world standards with the exception of US and CA.

[7Mary3]

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

 

 

What it boils down to is the US government/EPA sets one requirement and by law, California can set requirements that exceed those requirements. 

 

But that also begs this question-how can a state that has outsized influence over the country place a requirement that would affect the other 49 states? I know something like 14-17 other states use CARB in some shape, but if a company sued and it went to the Supreme Court (which I'm going to assume this already happened too), but it makes an interesting constitutional powers case. Which is the States can set laws that are not already set by the Federal government. 

 

Very simple, the California Air Resources Board existed long before the EPA did.  Therefore CARB is free to set any standard they wish, as long is it is at least as stringent as the federal EPA standard.  Other states are free to adopt either CARB or EPA standards as they wish.  In the long run it really doesn't matter much, it's always a case of the EPA eventually adopting CARB standards. 

 

I have often thought CARB must save the EPA a lot of effort in regards to vehicle emissions standards.  All the EPA has to do is see what CARB does then enact that a few years later...... 

Edited November 16, 2023 by 7Mary3

[iamweasel]

The issue with the California regs is there are multiple regs in that same state, and they each bring different rules to the table making it extremely complicated and almost impossible to understand/coordinate.  There are CARB rules, Omnibus low NoX rules, Advance Clean Fleet (ACF) rules, Advance Clean Trucks (ACT) rules, Clean Truck Check reporting, etc.  

 

With truck orders for next year, we can bascially pick 3 certification levels on each truck:

1)  No CARB certification

2)  49-state CARB

3)  California CARB

 

Due to OEM's needing to meet both California regulations and nationwide EPA requirements, on the Daimler side, they basically have given the dealers 2 groups of slots to order for 24CY:  A bucket of slots where you can do #1 or #2, and then another bucket of slots to get #3.  (Those trucks with #3 will cost $10-15K more than the trucks with the #2 certification.)

 

On top of that, there were new rules issued that changed what trucks can/can't be run through California.  For instance, we sell to a large body builder in California and now they are saying any truck that gets upfitted there, even if it will be registered in another state, will need the #3 certification.  That will absolutely destroy the competitiveness of that body builder versus their competitors in other states. They might as well pack up and move their business to Arizona or Nevada.  

 

So that being said, for the group of slots my company has to build #1 and #2 certifications, we are looking to transfer those slots to our Arizona stores and have the trucks invoiced out of those stores to bypass all this crap in California.  It's an absolute $%#@ show....

[GearheadGrrrl]

Sounds like this is turning into a major headache! What engines have or haven't been certified to meet the new CARB standards?

[twintornados]

Just a note that there are several States that have adopted California emission standards.

 

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/states-have-adopted-californias-vehicle-regulations

 

 

[silvrsvt]

3 hours ago, twintornados said:

Just a note that there are several States that have adopted California emission standards.

 

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/states-have-adopted-californias-vehicle-regulations

 

 

 

Adopted and enforcing are two different things, I have heard jack shit about diesels going away in NJ next year. 

[iamweasel]

11 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Adopted and enforcing are two different things, I have heard jack shit about diesels going away in NJ next year. 

 

Right.....no other state has the same rules as California right now.  Oregon was following that path but then bailed out of some of the rules a few weeks ago.  So as of now, at least the way we are ordering trucks, the groupings on the Daimler side are:

 

1)  California - on its own island of rules  (BIG Cost.....$10-15K added cost we have to pay the OEM for Cali registered trucks)

2)  Oregon, Maine and Pennsylvania - must order a specific CARB certification for those states, but it only adds $2K cost to the trucks.  With this certification, though, if the customer buys an extended powertrain warranty the cost of that warranty is lower than non-CARB certification so you can actually lower that $2K CARB penalty to $300-$500.  

3)  Everyone else, where you can do non-California CARB or non-CARB certification similar to option #2, and in most cases we are still doing the $2K CARB certification because you have to do that to get the clean idle sticker and the net cost increase is minimal when doing an extended powertrain warranty (which many customers do)

Edited November 19, 2023 by iamweasel

[twintornados]

7 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Adopted and enforcing are two different things, I have heard jack shit about diesels going away in NJ next year. 

 

Jus' sayin'.....

[GearheadGrrrl]

Minnesota adopted the previous CARB auto emissions standards, which are the same as the current EPA standards. We did not adopt emissions testing or choose to automatically follow changes in CARB standards. 

[7Mary3]

Interesting video, gives an idea how tough some of the older short-nose diesel trucks were to work on.  Amazing a Detroit 6-71 would fit in the N series, I heard the Cummins N series was even worse.

 

 

[Joe771476]

I'm seeing a lot of F-series flatbed tow truck mediums (650 or 750 I'm not sure) with Triple A motor club branding. Also, Gov. of CT just nixed the vote on 2035 EV mandate. Car mfrs. and govts. are slowly abandoning EV's.