Ram EcoDiesel Questions

Status
Not open for further replies.
How nice that failing a direct, cogent explanation to support your previous claims, you have simply resorted to vague insinuations instead.

A simple Google search of "2009 Duramax DPF problems" indicates that even the LMM suffers from the same issues as every other truck running this backwards technology.

All percentages and likelihoods aside, I have never ever heard of DPF problems on a truck that does not have one.

If someone really wants to do cleaning up of the air, they should put an end to the strip mining and dirty refinement that goes on in the foreign nations that supply us with a great deal of the rare metals that go into our environmentally "friendly" technology. Just because it goes up in the air in Asia, rather than America, does not mean the planet is any cleaner. It just means we get to bluster and honk about how "clean" our nation is, meanwhile living under the same sky where all of the fallout from the "clean" technology ends up.

But at least a lot of it is not our land, water table, flora and fauna being systematically eliminated by the demand for these eco-friendly products.

You and I do agree on one thing, though. There are definitely idiots out there who are going to see a diesel truck making smoke and think they are actually helping the environment by whining and complaining for greater testing and more eco-technology that will shift the ecological damage to another nation, and then exponentially multiply it in those foreign lands where environmentally disastrous practices can be conducted unrestricted and unaccounted at a net loss to the health of our planet. If only so many people in this state weren't struggling right now in our local economy, it might actually have a ghost of a chance of gaining support.

So many people who have been driving around in their post-consumer product whose greatest environmental impact was already made years ago, would be forced to purchase a new vehicle, sending them into tremendous debt, and contributing to greater demand of a new cycle of destruction and pollution that is the construction of a new vehicle. However great or small that may be, it is more significant than if been done at all.
 
One thing that gets missed in all of this emission stuff, is that there are more maintenance demands that come into play. Very few people take proactive measures when it comes to SCR, DPF's, and EGR on diesels. And, the old way of using these vehicles (excessive idling and other operational things we did in the past) have a more dramatic effect on the emissions stuff. And how many actually know, that the DPF filter requires periodic cleaning or replacement? It is common knowledge in the commercial trucking community, even though many there still fail to adequately adhere to this. And how many realize that the EGR cooler needs a periodic cleaning?

I see folks, regularly, that have commercial heavy diesels and have nary a problem with this stuff, because they follow established maintenance guidelines regarding their equipment. I do see a myriad of folks who do have problems, but when you cut thru the clutter, you find out that they have not changed the way they operate their engines or fail to follow guidelines the OEM has laid out for maintenance. It is sad to say, but there are many commercial truck owners who never open the operation manual on their truck and engine.
 
Closing in on 5k miles....3,500 of towing a 2,500 lb trailer.

LOVE>>>>LOVE this truck.....

Far superior to my previous Hemi.
 
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Also, you need to do a bit more research on how a diesel engine works. Any diesel engine modified to produce substantially more horsepower than stock is going to throw a lot of smoke. Even a stock truck with an unfiltered exhaust will throw smoke under acceleration...so, there's a good possibility that the smoke being produced has absolutely nothing to do with appearance, or you, or anyone else. Just a truck owner who wanted more power out of his truck so he could enjoy it a little more, and get his work done more easily.


What an ill-informed and antiquated viewpoint.

Look, I literally grew up around the trucking industry. Now, I live on a farm. Long story short, I've been around diesel engines of all varieties, from early 20th century iron to present.

If you simply "turn the fuel up", via mechanical or more modern electronic means, then yes -- you'll get lots of smoke. However, when a paradigm shift occurs towards delivering clean power well in excess of stock levels, you're rewarded with absolutely minimal soot output.

It certainly takes more time, research, and $$$ to run cleanly (proper parts selection, solid tuning, etc), but it's indeed possible if you're so inclined.
 
I took a better approach to the emission game with my 2013 Freightliner. I ordered a truck with no engine or transmission. I then dropped in a factory rebuilt pre-egr Detroit Series 60 and factory rebuilt trans. All for a LOT less than a truck with new engine and all this emission nonsense. And it was all legal! EPA ties the emission standard to the year the engine was produced and not the vehicle, if the vehicle is ordered without an engine. Can't legally yank out an emission laden engine and replace with a earlier engine, but if one orders the truck without the drivetrain components, you can drop in whatever you want.

If only the pickup OEM's would offer their products without drive train components, then we could do the same thing with them.

And the power turned up throwing more smoke. Poppycock. I have the Detroit 60 turned up, ECM tweaked, producing much more than stock. But I also put on a ported, polished, ceramic coated manifold, larger Borg Warner turbo with a blanket on it, run out to twin stacks up the back with Walker Megaflow mufflers. I hardly ever get smoke at all. Just an occasional puff on a shift. Never on a hard hill pull with a heavy load. And that 12.7L engine will walk the hills right along with 15L Cats and Cummins.

I may be throwing more NOx than an EGR/SCR engine, but I am not putting out much more, if any more, soot and particulates. It is a darn efficient setup. I never cared for the rolling coal nonsense. That is for folks with low self esteem issues. I want every drop of fuel to do work, not just shove it out the stacks.
 
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Also, you need to do a bit more research on how a diesel engine works. Any diesel engine modified to produce substantially more horsepower than stock is going to throw a lot of smoke. Even a stock truck with an unfiltered exhaust will throw smoke under acceleration...so, there's a good possibility that the smoke being produced has absolutely nothing to do with appearance, or you, or anyone else. Just a truck owner who wanted more power out of his truck so he could enjoy it a little more, and get his work done more easily.


What an ill-informed and antiquated viewpoint.

Look, I literally grew up around the trucking industry. Now, I live on a farm. Long story short, I've been around diesel engines of all varieties, from early 20th century iron to present.

If you simply "turn the fuel up", via mechanical or more modern electronic means, then yes -- you'll get lots of smoke. However, when a paradigm shift occurs towards delivering clean power well in excess of stock levels, you're rewarded with absolutely minimal soot output.

It certainly takes more time, research, and $$$ to run cleanly (proper parts selection, solid tuning, etc), but it's indeed possible if you're so inclined.



Is the emission system that bad on these Eco-diesel engines, that it's a cause for concern? I've read nothing but good things about this set up. Thanks
 
Quote:
Is the emission system that bad on these Eco-diesel engines, that it's a cause for concern? I've read nothing but good things about this set up. Thanks


There is nothing wrong with the emission system on the Ram 1500 with the Eco-Diesel engine. The rants on here are people going off the deep end on n0n Eco-Diesel experiences.

I own one and have had ZERO issues with the truck and avg 26.7 mpg in a 1500 4x4 with mostly city driving.
 
Originally Posted By: rossn2
Quote:
Is the emission system that bad on these Eco-diesel engines, that it's a cause for concern? I've read nothing but good things about this set up. Thanks


There is nothing wrong with the emission system on the Ram 1500 with the Eco-Diesel engine. The rants on here are people going off the deep end on n0n Eco-Diesel experiences.

I own one and have had ZERO issues with the truck and avg 26.7 mpg in a 1500 4x4 with mostly city driving.


I heard similar praises from owners of the Eco-Diesel Rams and GC's. Thanks for the info.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: rossn2
Quote:
Is the emission system that bad on these Eco-diesel engines, that it's a cause for concern? I've read nothing but good things about this set up. Thanks


There is nothing wrong with the emission system on the Ram 1500 with the Eco-Diesel engine. The rants on here are people going off the deep end on n0n Eco-Diesel experiences.

I own one and have had ZERO issues with the truck and avg 26.7 mpg in a 1500 4x4 with mostly city driving.



I heard similar praises from owners of the Eco-Diesel Rams and GC's. Thanks for the info.


As always, some mfgrs figure out the new tech and develop it BEFORE release and others let their clients do the field testing!

VM Motori has a rich history of innovation and quite a record of achievements with diesels in many markets. The little V6 used by Dodge is a sweetheart...
 
Originally Posted By: rossn2
Quote:
Is the emission system that bad on these Eco-diesel engines, that it's a cause for concern? I've read nothing but good things about this set up. Thanks


There is nothing wrong with the emission system on the Ram 1500 with the Eco-Diesel engine. The rants on here are people going off the deep end on n0n Eco-Diesel experiences.

I own one and have had ZERO issues with the truck and avg 26.7 mpg in a 1500 4x4 with mostly city driving.
Guessing your EcoDiesel uses urea/DEF fluid with it's DPF? If it does, that's a far superior system compared to burning soot with raw fuel into the exhaust.
 
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
Originally Posted By: rossn2
Quote:
Is the emission system that bad on these Eco-diesel engines, that it's a cause for concern? I've read nothing but good things about this set up. Thanks


There is nothing wrong with the emission system on the Ram 1500 with the Eco-Diesel engine. The rants on here are people going off the deep end on n0n Eco-Diesel experiences.

I own one and have had ZERO issues with the truck and avg 26.7 mpg in a 1500 4x4 with mostly city driving.
Guessing your EcoDiesel uses urea/DEF fluid with it's DPF? If it does, that's a far superior system compared to burning soot with raw fuel into the exhaust.


Sure, it uses DEF, however, DEF does not eliminate EGR use. It just reduces it.
 
Quote:
Guessing your EcoDiesel uses urea/DEF fluid with it's DPF? If it does, that's a far superior system compared to burning soot with raw fuel into the exhaust.


Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but DEF is used after the DPF. If the DPF goes into REGEN it uses extra DIESEL to clean it by burning at higher temperature.

DEF is put into the system after the DPF to help clean any leftover stuff in the exhaust system.
 
DEF= diesel exhaust fluid handles NOX with the help of a catalyst ( like a gas Engine ) the other way to lower NOX is Heavy egr and that isnt so good, so def= good.
DPF= is diesel pariculate filter and it is just that , a soot filter wich requierse "burning out" cleaning.
-these are two different systems.
 
My opinions on this subject:
The engine itself is designed and manufactured by VM Mottori in Italy. Chrysler's quality control, whatever its condition, has no bearing on the performance or life of the engine. VM Mottori are well known in Europe and make good engines.

As for oil, follow the manufacturer's recommended practices and it will be fine. Overmaintenance is only a psychological issue, not based on facts but feelings, which is a reflection of most people today.

Do not be tuning on these engines. Why would you do this? Engineers spent countless hours testing and tweaking, to find the best balance between output, life, reliability, fuel consumption, emissions, etc. and they made the choices they made for a reason. Leave it alone. Can you change it? Yes. Should you? no.
Why would you want an engine to smoke? How juvenile is that? One dream of Diesel engineers for years has been to eliminate the smoke. Sure, part of the mechanism used is basically an exhaust filter which regenerates, but so what? Now the exhaust pipe doesn't even get sooty inside. Amazing. My opinions, based on 30 years of working with engines, and on having an engineering degree from an accredited university.
 
Last edited:
Well, to a point it is valid not to tune. The VM 2.8L diesel in my 2006 Jeep Liberty sure benefited from tuning. It gained some good performance and the mpg went from around 29-30 on a road trip to a consistent 33-35 on a road trip. Also, tuning out the EGR made a very noticeable positive effect on engine performance and better oil samples for sure. But that was then. Not sure how it all compares to the VM 3.0 that is coming out now. I like VM engines. Not entirely sold on this one only because it is a V motor. My preference is inlines when it come to diesels, or just about any engine for that matter. Not sure why they didn't just open up the 2.8L to 3.0L and continue on. The 2.8L was a killer engine. Cast block, wet sleeved, DOHC with Bosch common rail. Easy to get to things on it. Solid performer.

And tuning does not equate to smoke. I have tuned several diesels from the 2.8L on up to 15L varieties and they put out no more smoke than stock. Only if you over fuel them. A smart tune is one that feeds the optimum fuel and uses all of it in the combustion, while achieving better performance. Not into that stupid rolling coal game.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Well, to a point it is valid not to tune. The VM 2.8L diesel in my 2006 Jeep Liberty sure benefited from tuning. It gained some good performance and the mpg went from around 29-30 on a road trip to a consistent 33-35 on a road trip. Also, tuning out the EGR made a very noticeable positive effect on engine performance and better oil samples for sure. But that was then. Not sure how it all compares to the VM 3.0 that is coming out now. I like VM engines. Not entirely sold on this one only because it is a V motor. My preference is inlines when it come to diesels, or just about any engine for that matter. Not sure why they didn't just open up the 2.8L to 3.0L and continue on. The 2.8L was a killer engine. Cast block, wet sleeved, DOHC with Bosch common rail. Easy to get to things on it. Solid performer.

And tuning does not equate to smoke. I have tuned several diesels from the 2.8L on up to 15L varieties and they put out no more smoke than stock. Only if you over fuel them. A smart tune is one that feeds the optimum fuel and uses all of it in the combustion, while achieving better performance. Not into that stupid rolling coal game.


I like inline engines too. A small inline 6 diesel would be awesome. The problem might be it takes up too much real estate under the hood???
21.gif
Rolling coal doesn't impress me.
 
Anybody remember the testing that Ram was doing with Cummins for their half ton trucks prior to the bailout? Obviously the testing was put on hold until the storm cleared but in the process Chrysler sold out to Fiat. Fiat purchased 50% of VM's stake in 2011 from Penske, and bought the remaining share from government motors in 2013. I don't think the concept of a half ton diesel ever died within Chryslers ranks but the change of ownership definitely changed the game for the choice of drivetrain. This is the first time any manufacture in the states has had a solid light duty diesel engine platform at it's disposal, and I think we are going to see a lot more diesels popping up in different Chrysler products in the next 5+ years.

Chrysler may not have the best reputation of the big 3 but since Fiat acquired Chrysler there have been a lot of changes within the organization. Chrysler has made some serious gains in fit and fuction, and I gotta say it's quite refreshing to see such an improvement in quality. IMO the 4th gen Ram trucks are the best looking trucks of the other Dodge generations to date and Ford and GM, for that matter.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Well, to a point it is valid not to tune. The VM 2.8L diesel in my 2006 Jeep Liberty sure benefited from tuning. It gained some good performance and the mpg went from around 29-30 on a road trip to a consistent 33-35 on a road trip. Also, tuning out the EGR made a very noticeable positive effect on engine performance and better oil samples for sure. But that was then. Not sure how it all compares to the VM 3.0 that is coming out now. I like VM engines. Not entirely sold on this one only because it is a V motor. My preference is inlines when it come to diesels, or just about any engine for that matter. Not sure why they didn't just open up the 2.8L to 3.0L and continue on. The 2.8L was a killer engine. Cast block, wet sleeved, DOHC with Bosch common rail. Easy to get to things on it. Solid performer.

And tuning does not equate to smoke. I have tuned several diesels from the 2.8L on up to 15L varieties and they put out no more smoke than stock. Only if you over fuel them. A smart tune is one that feeds the optimum fuel and uses all of it in the combustion, while achieving better performance. Not into that stupid rolling coal game.


Wish I could tune out the EGR,also the soot burn-out on my 09 BMW X5 35d. Anyone know how?

Charlie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top