New engine advise
- Thread starter Floridaman
- Start date
If true, why do tractors with HP ratings below emissions requirements not have common rail fuel injection, engine controllers, DPFs, DEF, etc?
"Not even close to debatable"???
FWIW, I've owned and/or operated dozens of mechanically injected tractors and have found all suitable for intended purposes.
Last edited:
Don't think I've missed anything and confused by your question.
FWIW, the first partial sentence was deleated. Not sure how it reappeared unintentionally.
Re-read previous post ignoring first partial sentence while focusing on the last paragraph.
Last edited:
You have owned dozens of carbureted gasoline tractors and "foundcthem acceptable". But they are history. You can still buy a 35 HP gasoline garden tractor but in anything of any real size that technology is dead as a dodo and for good reasons.
On snd off road mechanically injected diesels are on the endangered species list and headed the same way. Its not because of emissions mandates. Its because they simply dont perform as well as the new common rail DI engines with high pressure fuel pumps and computerized engine manegment. Yes they are far more complicated and owners cant fix them in the barn with baling wire and pliers. But the technology is here to stay (until displacef by domething newer) and for good reasons.
Dan
Last edited:
Interesting discussion. Even my '02 F-250 7.3L Navistar engine has common rail DI with HEUI. The only failure I've experienced with the fuel system in 180,000 miles was the FIDM (fuel injector driver module) that lives up in the front fender area on the driver's side under the fender liner. I was able to buy an upgraded remanufactured unit from XDP for $255 that is supposedly less susceptible to corrosion related issues.
I swapped out the IDM, replaced all eight glow plugs, installed new valve cover gaskets from FEL-PRO and also replaced the glow plug relay and glow plug control module. Less than $500 for the parts and I did the work myself and 5,000 miles later all is good. I wasn't in the barn with baling wire and pliers but it really wasn't a hard job. The ability to read engine codes via the OBD port is extremely helpful of course, and basically tells you where to look. Running a chip and programmer from Dp-Tuner allowed me to see what the problem was the moment the IDM failed, when I was 6 miles from home.
I think that's what many of us want. We want the performance benefits of modern diesels along with the ability to be able to diagnose and fix (at a reasonable cost) most problems ourselves. This is entirely possible with the F-250, but my '24 F-450 is way more complicated and there is some stress there knowing that many of the systems are not DIY friendly. On the bright side, with the huge improvements in manufacturing over the past 20 years, the hope is that many of these systems are better designed and manufactured and so less susceptible to failure. That's what I'm hoping anyway. But one thing is sure, the performance of modern diesels is incredible compared to even 20 years ago and those improvements are obvious from the driver's seat.
Last edited:
I’m glad you found them suitable for their intended purposes. I love my L2501 for what it brings to the table as well.
That being said, it’s the “worst” running diesel engine I use, and is far outstripped by any HPCR on the market. If it weren’t for the emissions loophole for the 25hp threshold, I never would have purchased it. It’s a dinosaur being artificially propped up by government legislation.
Mechanically controlled engines are dead, or at the very least dying. It’s over for good reason. Time to embrace it.
Interesting but I fail to see how the low HP, non emission engines are being "propped up" by government legislation as such engines are the ones NOT covered by emissions regulations.
Have you any conception how much more your 2501 would cost if government legislation required it to have HPCR fuel injection, an engine controller, DPF, etc?
Methinks that there is a market for much less expensive engines without expensive emissions equipment. Your purchase of a "non emissions" tractor has demonstrated this. Whether there is a viable market for much more expensive engines having such emissions equipment absent government regulations is questionable and certainly "debatable."
Point being: Absent government meddling, free enterprise would provide products according to market preferences as it has done for centuries.
Absent government interference, manufacturers would provide inexpensive engines without HPCR, engine controllers, DPFs, DEF systems, etc., for those customers who do not wish to pay for such. If a viable market exists for much more expensive engines having the previously mentioned equipment, or some combination thereof, those customers who are willing to pay a premium price for the benefits, perceived or otherwise, of such can do so.
It is no coincidence that HPCR and the required engine controllers , DPFs, DEF, etc., were not developed and marketed until government regulations forced such.
Last edited:
I suppose that depends upon ones definition of "good reasons." I do not consider government meddling "good reasons."
Again, my earlier post:
"Absent government regulations, methinks that manufacturers would design and build diesel engines (and just about everything else) according to market demands. Such has been the case for decades, indeed, centuries. Some engines would have expensive common rail injection while others would not. Few, if any, would have DPFs and none would require DEF. Indeed, engines that are below the mandated emissions HP limit still do not have expensive common rail fuel injection, engine controllers, DPFs, DEF, and other such nonsense. Methinks such will remain the case until government forces change directly or indirectly."
Last edited:
Gov regulation did absolutely nothing to bring HPCR to the forefront of diesel injection.
It is simply the progression of technology. It’s superior in every single metric.
I absolutely would have loved to get a HPCR in my tractor, but it’s intermittent use all but guaranteed issues with the DPF down the road. I’m making do with less, for the simple fact that 25hp engines somehow are deemed less dangerous to the environment and don’t need one.
And once agsin - the adoptiin of common rail direct injection is not the result of government meddling. Its because it improves performance. Seventy-five percent of the light cars and trucks made today are GDI because they are more efficient, use less fuel, and produce more power from smaller displacenents. That percentage has increased drastically in the last 15 years and continues to grow. That fact is not lost on the diesel industry.
We are talking machines with hundreds of horsepower and million mile plus service life. You are stuck on low horsepower glorified lawnmowers designed for weekend warriors.
As TP said - that part is not debatable.
Dan
Last edited:
Absolutely! The 7.3L Navistar engine (Power Stroke) that Ford used in Super Duty trucks from '94 to '03 with common rail direct injection and HEUI replaced the cam driven injection used in 7.3 IDI engine. That change was driven by the desire for improved performance. The 6.0 was developed becuase the 7.3L Power Stroke was too noisy for CA. Then DPF and finaly DEF came along.
I like everthing about the current diesels with the exception of DPF, EGR and DEF, but EGR is my main gripe. If replacing the DPF is a once every 100k miles deal that's fine, but routing exhaust back into the engine is just a bad idea.
DPF and EGR are the two main combatants for the number 1 slot on my shit list, for sure.
With that being said, am I over thinking this by looking for a pre emission engine based on my needs?
I don’t have a problem with all of the emission stuff. Just like my truck, it’s designed to work, pull hard and does it Regen thing when needed with no dpf issues.
The concern I have with the little Kubota, Is that it’s not going to be worked as hard as my truck or as hard as a skid steer or a small tractor. It may run for 10, 20 or 30 minutes at a time, three or four times a day during the week.
are the emissions on these small engines the same as they are on vehicles whereas you have to use them, get them hot, so they have time to burn off the soot. I just don’t wanna run into issues with clogged filters or anything else emissions related because it’s not being worked as hard as it’s intended to.
I sure do love my ‘24 F250 HO. Sucks that it needed a new engine at 3,700 miles Because some dip shit cross threaded the oil galley plug from the factory and she was dripping Oil. Now I’m almost at 10k miles and she’s running strong!
North Idaho Wolfman
Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Member
Equipment
L3450DT-GST, Woods FEL, B7100 HSD, FEL, 60" SB, 743 Bobcat with V2203, and more
Shouldn't really be an issue as long as it runs high RPM's when it is working.
It may go into regen while working and want to stay running while it regenning even if your done.
is there a gauge on these motors that show when the filter is full or what % it is at Or even if it’s in the middle of a Regen? I can that info on my truck and determine if I need to take a different route home if needed
North Idaho Wolfman
Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Member
Equipment
L3450DT-GST, Woods FEL, B7100 HSD, FEL, 60" SB, 743 Bobcat with V2203, and more
Depends on the "dash / Display" that you get for it.
The higher end units will tell you.
And on other thing is if you're doing a bigger job you can do a forced regen and hammer it out while working.
Hell, if you’re worried about incomplete regens, let the thing run with the pump under load while you drive to the next job…
No matter how "hard" you use it keep RPM up and you minimize regens. Thats not hard to do.
Active regen's themselves are not an issue for me - the tractor just keeps on working. A couple days ago regen light came on just as I was getting ready to shutdown. I just kept working for another 10 minutes so it could complete. I really don't understand the hand wringing over regens.
Dan
Last edited: