akirby Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The Ram they tested had a mechanical problem during the test (A/C compressor wouldn't shut off), yet they are concerned about the Ford's reliability. Not to mention, these new trucks they are reviewing, they come with warrantees and any problems get fixed for free. It isn't a test of 10 year old trucks, of which 2/3s of them would be dissolving by that point where I live. Why are you guys still searching for logic where clearly none exists? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The Ram they tested had a mechanical problem during the test (A/C compressor wouldn't shut off), yet they are concerned about the Ford's reliability. Not to mention, these new trucks they are reviewing, they come with warrantees and any problems get fixed for free. It isn't a test of 10 year old trucks, of which 2/3s of them would be dissolving by that point where I live. What I like about that is that the Ram wins, despite breaking down completely, while this: http://blogs.motortrend.com/tested-preproduction-ford-explorer-13787.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 What I like about that is that the Ram wins, despite breaking down completely, while this: http://blogs.motortrend.com/tested-preproduction-ford-explorer-13787.html Well, I was click-baited there. JL has no credibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajvolpe Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Everyone knows that Dodge(Ram) is junk when it comes to accessories and reliability. They rust out and the AC has not worked consistently for many years. People bought Dodge, because it was cheaper than Ford or GM. Fiat bought this whole bag to get marketing share in the US and a dealer network. This they accomplished, but have not broken the barrier of reliability with the Fiat Brand or with their car or RAM products. Long after MPG wears off, the question arises, does it last long enough to recoup my depreciation. This is a factor of time, which is not on the side of Dodge(Ram), or their car brands. I am a believer of diesel powered trucks, cars and utility vehicles. I am thankful that RAM has offer this option in their truck. I am however fed up with all manufactures penalizing consumers for using WWII technology(minus emissions), and extracting premium prices, just because the average public is not familiar with this design. It is time for the public to rebel against onerous taxes imposed against fuel and the vehicles that employ such technology. Many of the vehicles in Europe and around the world employ this technology(Turbo boost). whether it is gas or diesel, and don't have a problem. Wake up America! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (minus emissions) It's not just the difference in fuel tax in the US that prevents widespread diesel adoption, it's also the fact that the US does not grant exceptions to emissions regs for diesel engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) It's not just the difference in fuel tax in the US that prevents widespread diesel adoption, it's also the fact that the US does not grant exceptions to emissions regs for diesel engines. Europe doesn't give diesel an emission pass either. Euro V is only slightly behind CARB standards for particulars and Euro VI regs for diesel will actually converge with CARB regs for diesel so all large diesel engines in Europe will need urea injection too. The main reason diesel is popular in certain European countries is because diesel either get lower fuel taxes vs. gasoline (e.g. France), or because those countries have CO2 emission based annual taxes (e.g. UK, Germany). This obviously have a real and significant impact on operating costs. In places where there is no such tax preference (e.g. Switzerland, Spain most of Eastern Europe), gasoline is more popular. Edited November 25, 2014 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Euro 2 ('96) was the first regime that provided an emissions break for diesels, and diesels began a rapid increase in market share at that time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_emission_standards 2011-2013 totals are all in the 55% range, down from 2010. Edited November 25, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 It's also worth observing that the Euro emissions standards are pathetic, and the tests used to evaluate compliance are far less rigorous than those used by the EPA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 It's also worth observing that the Euro emissions standards are pathetic, and the tests used to evaluate compliance are far less rigorous than those used by the EPA. Can you forward a link to the test regimes here? I could use some ammunition for my gas/diesel arguments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Okay. Here goes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_European_Driving_Cycle See the graph here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_European_Driving_Cycle#Urban_driving Note that there are only two tests, that the two tests, combined, are only 1,180 seconds long (19:40), run at 77 degrees F, with absolutely no auxiliary load on the engine (e.g. rear defrost, a/c). -- By comparison, US emissions tests require well over an hour to complete: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml The city test is 1,874 seconds long The highway test is 765 seconds long The high speed test is 596 seconds long The A/C test is 596 seconds long The cold weather test is 1,874 seconds long. The total test length is 1:35:05. Notes: The A/C test is run with the A/C on and a 95 degree lab. The cold weather test is run with the lab cooled to 20 degrees. in both instances, the car is started at ambient temp. Here are the current EPA regs: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/light-duty/tier2stds.htm Note that for Bins 1-4 of Tier 2, no detectable NOx, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and formaldehyde are permitted from new vehicles. For the remainder of the Bins, note that standards are appreciably lower than EU standards for every pollutant except carbon monoxide, which oxidizes rapidly in the atmosphere into CO2. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT-Keith Posted November 26, 2014 Author Share Posted November 26, 2014 What are the odds of a justification article in the coming weeks or days like the Explorer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) ............................................................ Edited November 26, 2014 by Bryan1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 So reading inbetween the lines on this one, is Fiat-Chrysler "buying" good press for their products by spending advertising dollars at magazines etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 So reading inbetween the lines on this one, is Fiat-Chrysler "buying" good press for their products by spending advertising dollars at magazines etc? Well to win most COTY awards you need to turn in a marking plan to show how you're going to use the COTY award in your advertising. Similar to when Honda showed the face lifted CR-V and included a photo in from the MT COTY award about 3 weeks before it released. They did this article to generate site traffic and get people to talk. Though it could be push back, maybe Ford didn't come to the table with COTY advertising like they thought they would or figured this would make Ford pay more $$$ to win the award over the Colorado. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 It's more like Ford stopped caring and stopped going out of their way to cater to their every whim. Ford realizes that these reviews and awards don't sell vehicles so why put up with their crap. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 I'm sure there will be a lot of articles coming out that will be much more positive for Ford. Even in this article, the Chevy compared poorly in a lot of areas. Also, the 2.7 is, more or less, the base engine, and it did 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and posted 90+ mph trap speeds in the quarter mile. The 3.5EB and 5.0 are going to put up ridiculous performance numbers for a pickup and will still put up pretty good mpgs compared to other gas powered V8s. MT may really llike the diesel, but due to its cost, it isn't really a mainstream option. It will be hard to not really like the F150 vs. the others when they are compared as they are typically optioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Though it could be push back, maybe Ford didn't come to the table with COTY advertising like they thought they would or figured this would make Ford pay more $$$ to win the award over the Colorado. I like the push back scenario. I'd have to think that the last few F150 TOTY awards have been pretty lucrative for MT. Of course, if I'm GM and I just bought the TOTY award for my Canyonado, I'm going to be pretty ticked about the beating the Silverado took on this test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT-Keith Posted November 26, 2014 Author Share Posted November 26, 2014 If GM wins TOTY with the Canyon, do you not think the Silverado coming in 3rd was apart of the deal? If the F150 wins it will be because the Dodge is either ineligible or the rules of eligibility have changed to encompass the Dodge like last year and it will win for a third consecutive year. Either scenario hurts MT's credibility, so it won't matter to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30 OTT 6 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Throughout the MT article there are links to "related articles" and each link sends you to a Dodge (sorry Serge, it's still a Dodge no matter what you say) Ram related story. All of the auto advertising blocks on the webpage seems to be for Dodge Ram as well. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Either scenario hurts MT's credibility, so it won't matter to me. How can you hurt something you never had? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajvolpe Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Great info and many thanks. I believe that generally diesel powered vehicles are considered to be approximately 30% more efficient, hence contribute less to the problem of consumption, regardless of the retail price. Also, for the same size vehicle, they usually employ smaller displacement engines that also run at lower rpm to achieve their rated output. Gasoline is very volatile. Remember WWII gas powered tanks vs. German diesel powered, and the ensuing result. Having owned many diesel powered trucks, admittedly all Fords, I have found that most of the problems encountered, have been the result of the emission equipment installed on the vehicle. From my superficial observation, most people who own these trucks drive them like they are in a NASCAR event(for show), and not the way they were intended, which contributes to many of the problems encountered. I believe that Ford's turbo gas engines have proven that, driven sensibly, they can achieve very good efficiency, coupled with longevity and reliability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 While diesel engines are, generally speaking, more efficient, you have to realize that diesel fuel requires more feedstock to produce and is a more carbon dense product than gasoline. A very efficient gas engine such as the 2.7L EB V6 is at or near parity in carbon output with the Dodge EcoDiesel, according to the EPA tests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Remember WWII gas powered tanks vs. German diesel powered, FWIW, German medium and heavy panzers were gasoline-engined. The Russkie T-34 and JS series were diesel. The problem with Shermans which the Germans called "Ronsons" (lights up first time every time) had to do with poor armor shape, and the exceptionally capable German armor-piercing rounds used by the PAK 40 75 mm and 88 mm tubes. Then again, once the Canucks got their act together (the US Army did not use the Firefly), the 17-pounder Sherman Firefly was the ballistic equivalent of the PAK 40 75mm in the Panther, and we got to give the panzers the full Michael Wittman, starting outside the Bocage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Actually the Sherman fire problems where from ammo storage/protection. That was addressed with additional armor welded to the hull then the introduction of "wet stowage" that was glycerin filled and smothered fired when ruptured. The US Army got Fireflies very late in the War in Italy, but they where never used in combat. The US Army didn't think the 17lb was a huge improvement over the 76mm found on Sherman's in summer of 1944 http://worldoftanks.com/en/news/21/The_Chieftains_Hatch_Firefly3/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajvolpe Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 I read online that the 2.7L cylinder pressures are approximately 2000 psi. I believe that is what dictated the design of the block composition(graphite/aluminum). Diesel engines are somewhere in the neighborhood of 2500 psi if I recall correctly, but work at a much higher compression ratio. The lack of spark plugs and the required ignition hardware also keep the design simpler except for the emission requirements. 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.