Diesel does not need to die

"TheHondaBro" (wwaveform) 10/01/2015 at 13:08 • Filed to: None

0

24

This R&T article was written about the diesel engine, and why it should die out. I am a firm believer in the diesel engine, and it should stick around no matter what.

Right now, the nation is in panic. Remember when the Connecticut school shooting happened and all of a sudden people were demanding stricter gun laws? That was just situational panic, and so is this.

He likens the difficulty of building a gasoline-powered semi truck to landing a rover on Mars. First of all, they need diesel engines. A gasoline engine woul never produce the same torque figures and fuel economy. Also, if building a gasoline truck is easier than landing a rover on Mars, I’m pretty sure building a clean diesel would be easier than building a gasoline truck.

VWs exersize in skirting the EPAs restrictions was in order to make power and fuel economy a selling point in their TDI models. It wasn’t necessarily hard to do. I believe an actual clean diesel is entirely possible, and we shouldn’t ban the diesel engine at all.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a2…

DrJohannVegas > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 13:16

2

I’d post a link to (I think...) HHFP’s discussion of what torque is, but I’m feeling exceedingly lazy.

Torque is a measure of force, and that force can be obtained through gear reduction. The big advantage of diesel in trucking is the reduced pumping losses under partial/light-load driving, which is what most highway cruising is, and where trucks do a lot of their miles. Those few points of efficiency add up in the long run.

Edit: Also, the cute little punch at climate science Baruth takes (accepting consistent science on one side as incontrovertible evidence, yet scare quoting it on the other) reminds me why I don’t read R&T that often, and his garbage in particular. What a prat.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 13:17

2

Pretty much my thought is “get back to me when you have a non-stoichiometric/lean CI gas engine that does the job, feebs.” Trying to build a gas engine setup for varying load/constant speed without that is mostly stupid, stupid, stupid. Not to mention the lower refining requirements. Oh, and the emissions of container ships and tankers relative to OTR trucks. So yeah, R&T = hurr durr.

DrJohannVegas > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 10/01/2015 at 13:20

4

BUT MAH OLDSMOBILE!!! EVIL DIESEL TOOK MY ICE CREAM.

OPPOsaurus WRX > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 13:24

1

desiels should die
- brought to you by turbo’d gas engine manufacturers

duurtlang > OPPOsaurus WRX 10/01/2015 at 13:31

0

Are there any mainstream manufacturers which don’t build turbo’d gas engines? Or which don’t build diesel engines?

TheHondaBro > duurtlang 10/01/2015 at 13:35

0

Toyota doesn’t turbo, but they do diesel.

TheHondaBro > DrJohannVegas 10/01/2015 at 13:38

0

OBUMMER CARE GAVE US DIRTY DIESELS!!

Textured Soy Protein > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 13:40

0

I think you would do well to leave the gun control reference out of this because it only encourages unnecessary side chatter about a divisive issue that has nothing to do with your overall point about diesel engines.

TheHondaBro > Textured Soy Protein 10/01/2015 at 13:46

0

I understand your trepidation. The gun control reference was just to reference to situational panic. I couldn’t think of another example off the top of my head where situational panic was present.

That being said, side conversations are not frowned-upon as long as the debates are nice and clean.

duurtlang > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 13:51

1

Although they were slow to adopt it, Toyota now offers the Auris (euro Corolla if you will) with a 1.2T gasoline engine.

TheHondaBro > duurtlang 10/01/2015 at 13:52

0

Damn. Well, Honda doesn’t do diesel, I’m sure of that.

qbeezy > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 13:53

0

My 2 observations about diesel engines. 1. They have a place in society and transportation . We of course need them for mostly commercial applications.

2. Diesels were hyped as a savior from the pollution of gas powered vehicles. “They will save the planet! Better gas mileage! Torque steering is fun!”

They lied. There’s no such thing as a “clean vehicle” even for electric cars. Branding and the hype train. Of course they made huge strides in the past decades, I’m looking at you 80’s. But with rumors of even other companies spewing out more emissions while selling a farce, can you really blame people for losing faith in it?

duurtlang > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 13:57

2

Sure they do. They offer a diesel in the Civic, HR-V and CR-V.

In Europe.

Until earlier this year you could get a diesel Accord as well, but the Accord as a whole was discontinued without replacement. In Europe.

415s30 W123TSXWaggoIIIIIIo ( •_•))°) > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 13:58

0

The diesel Land Cruisers have turbos.

TheHondaBro > duurtlang 10/01/2015 at 14:01

2

My whole life was a lie.

Textured Soy Protein > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 14:03

2

Ok, let me make this more clear:

You claim that increased demands for gun control in response to Sandy Hook were nothing more than “situational panic.” This is just not true.

“Situational panic” implies that people came up with the idea that stricter gun laws only because in direct response to the situation of Sandy Hook, they panicked, and started yelling that guns are bad. Regardless of what side of the gun control issue you are on, it’s pretty safe to say that people have been calling for stricter gun laws for a really long time .

Sure, when a gun-related tragedy happens, that draws more attention to the issue of guns, and more people demand stricter gun laws. But gun control was an issue which already existed when Sandy Hook happened , and therefore not simply a matter of situational panic.

Not only is what you’re saying about gun control totally wrong, it’s also a terrible example to use in support of the point you’re trying to make about diesel engines. Because unlike gun control, which people have been trying to implement for a really long time, nobody has been out there protesting or going on tv arguing that diesel engines are bad, or trying to pass laws that ban diesel engines.

duurtlang > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 14:06

1

Can you imagine driving a diesel Civic? DTEC just kicked in, yo!

TheHondaBro > Textured Soy Protein 10/01/2015 at 15:21

0

Never in my original post did I say more aggressive gun control wasn’t a thing before Sandy Hook. Of course it was a thing. So was the argument that diesel engines are bad to the environment. I’ve spoken with them online, I’ve spoken with them in real life.

If I weren’t so lazy, I’d make up a mathematical piecewise function with arbitrary numbers to prove to you my point in including the Sandy Hook example. No matter what the interest was in either example before the paradigm-shifting event, it climbs rapidly after said event. Doesn’t matter if prior interest was 10 or 10,000 or googol, it will rapidly increase, a phenomenon I’m calling situational panic .

If that’s not clear, I will make a graph.

Future next gen S2000 owner > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 15:56

0

Diesels can die a slow death as far as I’m concerned.

Twingo Tamer - About to descend into project car hell. > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 16:07

0

Diesels certainly have their place, but in european cities particulate matter is a huge problem. The air quality in cities is appalling and diesel has a lot to do with it. I don’t hate diesels (I owned one) but I do question their environmental effects.

RazoE > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 16:09

0

There are 2 turbo Lexus (NX and IS) right now, and I’m sure they’re going to put that engine into the Camry and drop the V6.

Textured Soy Protein > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 16:53

0

Never in my original post did I say more aggressive gun control wasn’t a thing before Sandy Hook. Of course it was a thing.

Actually, you did:

Remember when the Connecticut school shooting happened and all of a sudden people were demanding stricter gun laws?

The definition of sudden is:

happening, coming, made, or done quickly, without warning, or unexpectedly

Therefore, the phrase “all of a sudden people were demanding stricter gun laws,” means that after Sandy Hook, people were quickly, without warning, or unexpectedly talking about stricter gun laws.

To put it another way, your phrase reads as “before Sandy Hook people were not talking about gun control, and after Sandy Hook, they started talking about gun control.”

Whether or not that was your intention, that’s what your words actually mean . Then you said this:

That was just situational panic, and so is this.

A ccording to you , “situational panic” means, “the phenomenon where people pay more attention to an issue after a highly-publicized event involving that issue.”

The problem is that your word choice of “situational panic,” already has a meaning . Panic means ,

a sudden overwhelming fear, with or without cause, that produces hysterical or irrational behavior, and that often spreads quickly through a group of persons or animals.

By calling someone’s reaction to an event “just situational panic,” you are saying that person’s reaction is irrational behavior, based on fear.

Which means that whether or not you intended to mean this , what your original post actually means is the two following opinions:

People demanding stricter gun control after Sandy Hook were acting irrationally, based on fear.

Jack Baruth talking about getting rid of diesel engines after DieselGate is acting irrationally, based on fear.

What I’m saying is:

Opinion #1 is false.

Because Opinion #1 is false, using Opinion #1 as an analogy to Opinion #2, actually makes your argument in favor of Opinion #2 less valid.

Sorry, but no graph is going to change the meaning of the words you used. So if that’s not what you meant then you should’ve used different words.

TheHondaBro > Textured Soy Protein 10/01/2015 at 16:54

0

Okay, I apologize for my mistake. I was writing this on my phone waiting for my class.

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > TheHondaBro 10/01/2015 at 17:15

0

The diesel engine won’t die.

The guy at R&T doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

All they need to do in Europe is phase out the pre-2005 cars and pre-2010 trucks... or get them retrofitted with better emissions equipment.

And of course, government regulators need to go after anyone caught cheating.

Just because one company cheated with one engine, does not mean ALL diesel engines from all companies are doing it.