Here I am

Blue-Tec Discussion

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

% of Diesel In The Oil. How High Can It Go

2008 only - What do you think?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Okay, the new rig is in the yard and I'm starting to get familiar with all the bells and whistles. After driving thru Calgary last week and seeing a huge black haze hanging over the city, I am very pleased to have the clean diesel engine. That said, I haven't found one place here for the discussion of the pros/cons/issues and maintenance of the emissions systems on the 7. 5+ 6. 7L Cummins.



I'd like to use this thread as a starting point for that discussion.



So -



1 - I believe the Cummins does not use urea injection. Instead a catalytic converter is used for the NOX scrubbing.



2 - The DPF is a ceramic device that cleans particles from the exhaust gases. Cummins states that the filter needs to be cleaned or replaced @ 200,000 miles or so.



3 - The regen process is accomplished by adding fuel to the exhaust and burning the accumulated material leaving ash that is blown out.



4 - There have been some issues reported with this. Your experience with the technology could well be governed by the type of load you have on the engine. I. E. Loaded/Highway driving with higher EGT will enable the system to run cleaner and reduce the frequency of regens.





Thats the limit of my understanding at this time. I've read the Cummins brochure, referenced in another thread, but would like to see one place for discussions on Blue Tec.



Comments/Suggestions? Thanks H
 
This is good info for me already I have a 1995 5. 9 and have ordered a 08 4x4 2500 Laramie 6. 7 to be here in about four weeks and this is one of the big things i am worryed about and everybody tolded me to wait one more year and let cummings get all the bugs out. My thing is the bugs out !!!!!!! My 1995 has 405617 miles on it I hate to let her go I bought it new in 11/94.
 
Quote:3 - The regen process is accomplished by adding fuel to the exhaust and burning the accumulated material leaving ash that is blown out.



The ash is not blown out. It accumulates and is the reason the DPF must eventually be cleaned / replaced.

George
 
1 - I believe the Cummins does not use urea injection. Instead a catalytic converter is used for the NOX scrubbing.

Correct does not use UREA injection.....

2 - The DPF is a ceramic device that cleans particles from the exhaust gases. Cummins states that the filter needs to be cleaned or replaced @ 200,000 miles or so.

Every driver is different... . our new 5500 will be used as a highway truck... . we expect to see above average life...

4 - There have been some issues reported with this. Your experience with the technology could well be governed by the type of load you have on the engine. I. E. Loaded/Highway driving with higher EGT will enable the system to run cleaner and reduce the frequency of regens.

I'm attending a 2 day seminar on these systems in a week in Las Vegas... . ""Reducing Diesel Emissions-Applications, Operation, and Maintenance of Diesel Particulate Filters"" So I'll know more in a few weeks... . I expect this to be the same learning curve that we went through with Catalitic Converters years ago... Back than there were a lot of people who wanted to remove them... some are still doing that today... .

I personally think that more head roads could be achieved to remove from service the million or so 2 cycle 3 wheel carts in India as well as all cars that didn't meet the 1990's standard for emission's around the world. .
 
Good Stuff!

So what purpose does the Regen Cycle fulfill? We dump fuel into the exhaust stream, the ash accumulates in the DPF and eventually shutdown the flow of gases.



How would cleaning be accomplished? A DIY approach of a trip to the dealer or Cummins?



Looking forward to hearing whats what from the seminar you're going to take.



Thanks All... This is interesting!!
 
So what purpose does the Regen Cycle fulfill? We dump fuel into the exhaust stream, the ash accumulates in the DPF and eventually shutdown the flow of gases.





Soot accumulates in the DPF, then regen burns the soot (black) to ash (grey). A lot of soot burns into just a little bit of ash.
 
the fact is you are still burning something,



what is better,



1)a 2007 5. 9 that gets 20mpg and has a cat



or



2)2 2007. 5 6. 7 that gets 12mpg and burns the collected carbon with raw diesel and not to mention the diesel that collects in our engine.



Now what fumes are you producing with that method?

What is better over 5yrs.



1) "mega cab 3/4 ton auto"In my 6. 7. i average 12 mpg when i figure it on paper. I drive about 50k miles a yr. over 5yrs that is 250k miles. with a 35gal tank and getting 12mpg that equals to 20,833 gals of diesel burned



2)my 2004. 5 "1 ton QC dually 4x4" i averaged 18mpg on that truck, so 250k miles in 5yrs equals 13,888 gals diesel burned



i feel that option 2 is better
 
the fact is you are still burning something,



what is better,



1)a 2007 5. 9 that gets 20mpg and has a cat



or



2)2 2007. 5 6. 7 that gets 12mpg and burns the collected carbon with raw diesel and not to mention the diesel that collects in our engine.



Now what fumes are you producing with that method?

What is better over 5yrs.



1) "mega cab 3/4 ton auto"In my 6. 7. i average 12 mpg when i figure it on paper. I drive about 50k miles a yr. over 5yrs that is 250k miles. with a 35gal tank and getting 12mpg that equals to 20,833 gals of diesel burned



2)my 2004. 5 "1 ton QC dually 4x4" i averaged 18mpg on that truck, so 250k miles in 5yrs equals 13,888 gals diesel burned



i feel that option 2 is better

I am voting for option 2 as well. My 99 w/ edge comp, 100 hp injectors & Aurora 2000 turbo, dynoed at 450 hp gets 19. 9 mpg doing the math.

My new 2007. 5 6. 7 Mega Cab Stock. 13. 5 MPG hwy. This is running empty. Both from LA to Vegas. THis is a 30% decrease in fuel economy. Now "THATS" good for the environment???!!!!:confused::confused:
 
I am voting for option 2 as well. My 99 w/ edge comp, 100 hp injectors & Aurora 2000 turbo, dynoed at 450 hp gets 19. 9 mpg doing the math.

My new 2007. 5 6. 7 Mega Cab Stock. 13. 5 MPG hwy. This is running empty. Both from LA to Vegas. THis is a 30% decrease in fuel economy. Now "THATS" good for the environment???!!!!:confused::confused:

It's good for the oil industry!
 
The trouble is that you really can't expect much more than 500K out of the body and chassis... we trade at 500K or I should say sell the old one at auction and buy new... On our 04, 04. 5, 05 I'm going to try and stretch that to 600-750K based on what they look like and drive like at 500K... . but my Fords were done at 500K. . My current F550's body and chassis are good but the power stroke and transmission are close to being scrap...
 
Man... ... I' glad people are starting to see the truth about this dpf crap ... . the pollution is still being created. I mean you are dead right Paul Barker the damn thing has to be releasing something when it does the regen. I have walked through junkyards and seen catalytic converters laying on the bare dirt ... . The platinum pellets still have pollutants on them right ... . or have they already leached out into our water table? I'll bet the pollution genie doesn't come around and make them dissappear! If its loud ,stinks, or smokes I gotta have it!
 
Mileage -

:mad:



Well so far mileage is less than acceptable. Started off around 16. 7 MPG, and that was all highway... Getting 14 - 15 now around town and codes showing up.



Better is less fuel per mile, clean and efficient. I still have 2nd thougts about the BlueTec... I hope there will be an option to pull the DPF that won't screw up the computer and put this engine back where it belongs in performance.



H
 
I think we are missing the point here. There is no specific law other than CAFE that mandates the truck has to get a specific fuel economy. As long as the manufacturer’s fleet meets the CAFE, they are in compliance. Unfortunately there is no standard in the emission requirements for fuel economy. There are however very specific mandates relating to sulfur, particulates, NOx, and other harmful emissions. So the manufacturers HAVE to meet those standards. But to do them, it results in loss of economy. I'm sure had the people who set the standards realized that to meet them, they would be burning more fuel, things might have been different. That is the risk you take when policy makers make laws without knowing anything about the industry they are regulating. And don't think that Cummins and Dodge engineers could not think of a better more cost effective way to meet the standards.
 
I'm sure had the people who set the standards realized that to meet them, they would be burning more fuel, things might have been different. That is the risk you take when policy makers make laws without knowing anything about the industry they are regulating.

This is exactly the point!!
 
Bureaucrats and Rocket Scientists

I Concur...



Fuel economy is important and if I need to burn fuel to turn soot (which to my not scientific mind is harmless unless suspended as smog) into ash (which may or may not be harmless) you have to question the driver behind the technology.



The old cartoon of varying swing designs lines up with policy development. You know what you want, but after all the pundits weigh in, all you get is a disaster.



Still while I miss the sound of my '93, I do believe my nose flares significantly, as I gently press down on the throttle, and the Black Beast QUIETLY but most FIRMLY pulls away from the rest of the traffic!!!
 
It will be interesting to see how ford and chevy meet the 2010 requirements. Just because the Blu-tec was first to be compliant does not mean that it will be the best or most fuel efficient. There are alot of people out there with more brains than me and several of them work for the manufacturers.
 
Seriously Thinking about the DPF Delete

While I admit I kinda like not seeing the black cloud spewing from my truck, the impact to the pocket book in lost fuel economy and the potential for trouble with a plugged DPF concerns me. I'm considering putting in a delete kit and wondered if -



That would eliminate the concern about ULSD? Until the ULSD is universal, not having to worry about the grade would be nice.



W/O the DPF would the need for CJ-4 oil be eliminated? My understanding is that CJ-4 is great for the DPF, not so great for the engine!!



h
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top