2010 engine test fleets weigh in
This is a really good article on the 2010 engines that fleets have been testing.
This is a really good article on the 2010 engines that fleets have been testing.
2010 Engine test fleets
- Thread starter TeamCaffee
- Start date
Doggie Daddy
Veteran Expediter
Difficult article to get through as the words all run together,guess they are too cheap to afford proof readers.
You are right Moose it is that! Still it is the way of the future and we better learn what we can.
They say they are getting better fuel economy, but once the cost of the carb fluid is added, I am not so sure? I read a report somewhere that indicated they were more expensive to operate.
Outside of that, the other concern is longevity because of the excessive heat. Some of these run considerably hotter which will likely cause premature wear on other components surrounding the engine. That is everything from alternators to wiring and hoses.
Early tests last year showed alot of heat related issues once they had some miles on them. Not sure what changes have been addressed on that over the last year?
Outside of that, the other concern is longevity because of the excessive heat. Some of these run considerably hotter which will likely cause premature wear on other components surrounding the engine. That is everything from alternators to wiring and hoses.
Early tests last year showed alot of heat related issues once they had some miles on them. Not sure what changes have been addressed on that over the last year?
I asked Henry Albert about this:
The only way you get extra heat is if you are using advanced EGR the SCR does not cause a heating problem. The SCR actually is easier on the engine as it treats the emissions after the combustion process instead of during. This allows the engines to run much as they did in the past.
The only way you get extra heat is if you are using advanced EGR the SCR does not cause a heating problem. The SCR actually is easier on the engine as it treats the emissions after the combustion process instead of during. This allows the engines to run much as they did in the past.
Last edited:
moose
Veteran Expediter
Lipstick service ...
BTW , did you know that Iveco makes Tier 5 emissions engines WITHOUT ANY EGR ?
(i will post a link over the weekend ,IF i have the time)
they will never bring tho's Economy engines over here , unless WE ask for it .
or we can continue to listen to the salesmanship machine ...
& buy whatever they shove under the hood.
While Henry's take on things may be a little pro Detroit Diesel he IS right.
SCR engines will have FAR LESS of the heat issues that full EGR engines can have. EGR rates of a 2010 SCR engine will fall back into the 15% to 25% range while the EGR only solution will likely have rates well in excess of 50%. I say likely because International (the only EGR only provider) STILL does not have a fully 2010 compliant engine ready to go. International will rely on emission credits from the EPA and hope to get their engine figured out before the credits run out (one of the reasons they are selling trucks so cheap today, to get more credits).
As far as Euro emissions go, the EPA is actually ahead of the EU this time. The NOx emission standards are tighter than Euro 5 or even the 2013 proposed Euro 6. The Euro emissions have focused more on PM (soot in the exhaust) while the EPA has gotten agressive with NOx. Both standards attack both emissions but the EU is less stringent on NOx. PM is by far the easier of the 2 to control. North American OEM's would love to be able to use the less stringent Euro rules.
Either way, it would still be wise for anyone spec'ing a new truck to buy the largest radiator you can put in the truck. A larger rad results in improved ability to handle heat WITHOUT having to run the fan. Less fan = better MPG
Not to sound like any kind of salesman, but if I was buying a truck right now, I would be waiting until I could get a 2010 SCR engine.
SCR engines will have FAR LESS of the heat issues that full EGR engines can have. EGR rates of a 2010 SCR engine will fall back into the 15% to 25% range while the EGR only solution will likely have rates well in excess of 50%. I say likely because International (the only EGR only provider) STILL does not have a fully 2010 compliant engine ready to go. International will rely on emission credits from the EPA and hope to get their engine figured out before the credits run out (one of the reasons they are selling trucks so cheap today, to get more credits).
As far as Euro emissions go, the EPA is actually ahead of the EU this time. The NOx emission standards are tighter than Euro 5 or even the 2013 proposed Euro 6. The Euro emissions have focused more on PM (soot in the exhaust) while the EPA has gotten agressive with NOx. Both standards attack both emissions but the EU is less stringent on NOx. PM is by far the easier of the 2 to control. North American OEM's would love to be able to use the less stringent Euro rules.
Either way, it would still be wise for anyone spec'ing a new truck to buy the largest radiator you can put in the truck. A larger rad results in improved ability to handle heat WITHOUT having to run the fan. Less fan = better MPG
Not to sound like any kind of salesman, but if I was buying a truck right now, I would be waiting until I could get a 2010 SCR engine.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Piper,
Why are the EU standards less stringent, they are have more compact living centers, use more fuel per mile because of the congestive living and their attack on particle emissions has been effective to a point starting in '89 - so I would think they would lead us in all aspects of regulations.
Why are the EU standards less stringent, they are have more compact living centers, use more fuel per mile because of the congestive living and their attack on particle emissions has been effective to a point starting in '89 - so I would think they would lead us in all aspects of regulations.
When at Detroit Diesel we saw the chart of when the EU standards would be the same as our standards. I was also surprised about the standards.
Usually they do Greg, this time however, and this is my personal opinion, we have California to thank.
CARB has been waging a war on the smog part of pollution (NOx) as it is a particularly bad problem in Cali due to some geographical factors. CARB was going ahead with it's own super strict regulations and I think the EPA woke up and decided that they better get their rules more in line with CARB's or it would result in an economic island so to speak and severely disrupt interstate trade. So they decided to play catch up.
Particulate matter is (my opinion) more of a health and air quality concern but the optics of brown haze over LA and the political sexiness of being able to say "we are doing something dear voter!" has I believe got us to this point.
The PM limits for EPA2010 are .01 g/hp/hr and Euro5 it is .02g/kw/h. There is .746 of a kw in a hp. In that respect the Euro limit is around .014 g/hp/hr. Euro 6 (2013) is going to be .007 g/hp/hr. So EPA 2010 is in between the two.
When it comes to NOx, EPA 2010 is .02 g/hp/hr, Euro 5 is 1.492 g/hp/hr. As you can see that is quite a bit (realatively speaking) higher than EPA. This would lend itself to the EGR free Euro 5 engine Moose is talking about (EGR is a NOx fighter, nothing else). Of note, Euro 6 is still going to be .373 g/hp/hr.
Fighting NOx is the difficult thing to do, it brought us to EGR, EGR makes the combustion very dirty, resulting in the need for DPF (soot filters). We had super clean diesels in 1994-98 except for NOx. When someone finally perfects a practical NOx absorber (Eaton for one is working hard on this) happy days will indeed be here again and we will get back all of our fuel economy. The reason I like SCR so much is it gets us part of the way there, by letting the engine burn efficient again and cleaning up the exhaust after the fact.
If I keep writing answers like this people are going to start calling me Turtle II.
CARB has been waging a war on the smog part of pollution (NOx) as it is a particularly bad problem in Cali due to some geographical factors. CARB was going ahead with it's own super strict regulations and I think the EPA woke up and decided that they better get their rules more in line with CARB's or it would result in an economic island so to speak and severely disrupt interstate trade. So they decided to play catch up.
Particulate matter is (my opinion) more of a health and air quality concern but the optics of brown haze over LA and the political sexiness of being able to say "we are doing something dear voter!" has I believe got us to this point.
The PM limits for EPA2010 are .01 g/hp/hr and Euro5 it is .02g/kw/h. There is .746 of a kw in a hp. In that respect the Euro limit is around .014 g/hp/hr. Euro 6 (2013) is going to be .007 g/hp/hr. So EPA 2010 is in between the two.
When it comes to NOx, EPA 2010 is .02 g/hp/hr, Euro 5 is 1.492 g/hp/hr. As you can see that is quite a bit (realatively speaking) higher than EPA. This would lend itself to the EGR free Euro 5 engine Moose is talking about (EGR is a NOx fighter, nothing else). Of note, Euro 6 is still going to be .373 g/hp/hr.
Fighting NOx is the difficult thing to do, it brought us to EGR, EGR makes the combustion very dirty, resulting in the need for DPF (soot filters). We had super clean diesels in 1994-98 except for NOx. When someone finally perfects a practical NOx absorber (Eaton for one is working hard on this) happy days will indeed be here again and we will get back all of our fuel economy. The reason I like SCR so much is it gets us part of the way there, by letting the engine burn efficient again and cleaning up the exhaust after the fact.
If I keep writing answers like this people are going to start calling me Turtle II.
moose
Veteran Expediter
Here you go :
http://www.trucktrend.com/features/news/2009/163_news090108_volvo_fh16_video_game/photo_02.html
2010 Volvo FH16 ,
Tier 5 .
no EGR .
only 3% Uriah.
700 HP.
1149 breaking HP. (truck)
now can someone explain ,
why they don't sell the same Engine over here ?
(& that radiator can fit into a Mini-Minor ).
http://www.trucktrend.com/features/news/2009/163_news090108_volvo_fh16_video_game/photo_02.html
2010 Volvo FH16 ,
Tier 5 .
no EGR .
only 3% Uriah.
700 HP.
1149 breaking HP. (truck)
now can someone explain ,
why they don't sell the same Engine over here ?
(& that radiator can fit into a Mini-Minor ).
Last edited:
Because it won't meet the EPA standard for NOx. So they call it a D16 and clog it up with EGR and SCR (urea at 3%).
moose
Veteran Expediter
an interesting reading :
Green Car Congress: Volvo Introduces New 16-Liter, 700hp Euro 5 Truck Engine
(also a good read is the 2nd comments )
Mark this date : 8 January 2009
Let's see how long it will take them to bring on the electronically controlled exhaust brake (EPG)
or the 425 kW braking effect.!!!
along with 10 others goody's they got there , but refused to sell over here...
Green Car Congress: Volvo Introduces New 16-Liter, 700hp Euro 5 Truck Engine
(also a good read is the 2nd comments )
Mark this date : 8 January 2009
Let's see how long it will take them to bring on the electronically controlled exhaust brake (EPG)
or the 425 kW braking effect.!!!
along with 10 others goody's they got there , but refused to sell over here...