This may be....

[Jim Warman]

... interesting to some. Clickeeeee . Compares some bits of Eurodiesel to America.

[Keith Browning]

I have never seen the cost comparison broken down like that and it clearly shows diesel vehicles being more costly that gasoline vehicles in the end.

 

Thank the EPA for the higher cost of the vehicles and the fuels we use here in North America.

 

Also, I love how they pulled that video off of Youtube showing that asshole and his black soot belching peice of shit. That is not the typical diesel and it does nothing to help the reputation of diesls here.

[Steve Mutter]

The guy nailed it, it just plain cost more to run a diesel in North America. My friends just got rid of a 2011 VW diesel, with well under 100 000 kms. Minor engine problems like sensors and stuff started causing them to have $2000 hits at the repair shop.

[Keith Browning]

It is simply not cost effective in cars - trucks, depending on the use it make perfect sense however. I am sure there is a market for them because there are people like me whom would buy one "just because" it is a diesel. However, as this topic is discussing, the added cost of the diesel engine and aftertreatment system is the main issue.

 

As Mutter pointed out, the cost of repairs on diesel engines in comparison to a gasoline engine is also greater. Ever look at some of the invoices for the trucks we work on? This is why I still cannot understand why so many people want these diesel pick-ups that have absolutely no use for them.

[Jim Warman]

This is why I still cannot understand why so many people want these diesel pick-ups that have absolutely no use for them.

In the late 50s and early 60s, it was the land yachts. My Dadhad a 59 Pontiac Laurentian station wagon. This thing was huge - the roof looking like a medium sized aircraft carrier. The mid 60s saw pony cars - build a small car and stuff a medium to large V8 into it. In the 70s, it became boogie vans - an orgy pit on wheels. In the 80s, the minivan. In that entire time, auto makers kept searching for the next "niche" car.

 

Today, it is the "big truck". The motor vehicle fills a unique place in north America... it is a status symbol, a toy, freedom, a penis enlarger along with many other roles. If you are a !?@#%! - you can have a swoopy car and people will look at you different. If you act like an ass, people will look at your ride and see you differently (or so many like to think this is so).

 

In our culture, your choice of transport can say as much about who you would like to be as your haircut, your wardrobe, whether you pop your collar or use spray tan or believe axe deodorant commercials.

 

Freudian? I'm pretty sure but you must remember I'm a grade 8 dropout and my chances of being erudite in Freuds way of thinking is between slim and nil.

 

I do wish that any reports that use a chipped up sound bite would have the temerity to mention that the smokey truck is owned by a scofflaw - someone that views the environment as something we can gamble with - someone that will shit on your front porch.

 

[mchan68]

The knucklehead that started this thread is in my mind the perfect example of why the EPA is cracking down on diesel powered pickups with ever so increasingly stringent tailpipe emissions standards:

 

http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1222105-i-want-to-roll-coal.html

 

Also interesting to note the strong sentiments expressed by almost everyone who chimed in to reply.

[Jim Warman]

Actually, the EPA isn't responding to "rolling coal". EPA regulations are addressing environmental conditions. "Rolling coal" is alerting the EPA to those that contravene the spirit of the legislation.

 

The earliest automotive emissions controls that I recall come from the late 60s. Gone was the road draft tube in favour of the PCV system. Also, we saw the introduction of the first thermactor systems. GM called these A.I.R. systems.

 

To add context, this was at a time when the news featured "smog reports" - going as far as to recommending that people avoid leaving home if possible - Tokyo and the Los Angeles basin are two that I recall being mentioned regularly.

 

EPA emissions requirements have driven technology. The very first EGR valves I saw were crude efforts by todays standards but that's where we stood as far as current technology allowed.

 

Fast forward to the vehicles of today. Why do we have the stringent emissions controls that we see? Because we CAN DO IT.

 

Law breakers are law breakers. Polluters are polluters. I doubt we will ever see zero emissions. But, at the very least, each and every one of us should be doing what we can.

 

What is truly sad is that I know of instances where fleets have requested defeating emissions controls - talk about "good corporate citizens"....

[mchan68]

Actually, the EPA isn't responding to "rolling coal". EPA regulations are addressing environmental conditions. "Rolling coal" is alerting the EPA to those that contravene the spirit of the legislation.

 

The earliest automotive emissions controls that I recall come from the late 60s. Gone was the road draft tube in favour of the PCV system. Also, we saw the introduction of the first thermactor systems. GM called these A.I.R. systems.

 

To add context, this was at a time when the news featured "smog reports" - going as far as to recommending that people avoid leaving home if possible - Tokyo and the Los Angeles basin are two that I recall being mentioned regularly.

 

EPA emissions requirements have driven technology. The very first EGR valves I saw were crude efforts by todays standards but that's where we stood as far as current technology allowed.

 

Fast forward to the vehicles of today. Why do we have the stringent emissions controls that we see? Because we CAN DO IT.

 

Law breakers are law breakers. Polluters are polluters. I doubt we will ever see zero emissions. But, at the very least, each and every one of us should be doing what we can.

 

What is truly sad is that I know of instances where fleets have requested defeating emissions controls - talk about "good corporate citizens"....

And I'm curious as to how you would handle things, if you were approached by one or more of your supperiors requesting your assistance to arrange granting that said request by a couple of fleet owners, knocking on your dealer's doorstep to do business with you. This is while your supperiors only have $$$ in their minds when they accept said fleet's business with the attitude that if you refuse it, someone else down the street will gladly accept it.

[Jim Warman]

I suggest you contact the labour relations board in your province. Your employer cannot force you to perform illegal acts.

 

FWIW... I am never given an RO requesting a distasteful act. At the same time, there are "techs" that will blindly do whatever is asked. You can read shit in there and possibly be right.

 

My morality is mine and mine alone. My feelings are "respected" but not accepted in our shop. My integrity is a non-negotiable factor.

 

If you act like a prostitute, people will start to think you are a prostitute.

 

Because someone else is willing to break the law doesn't grant me the right to follow suit.

 

Doing the right thing appears to be unpopular... but it has to start somewhere. If not with us... then where?

[Aaron]

My typical reply to the assclowns that want to "roll coal" is to put a bunch of garbage bags over the inlet to the air filter.

 

The kid who eats too many marbles doesn't grow up to have kids of his own.

 

Fortunately, most of those marble-eaters have OHSA to protect them, at least in the work place.