will people stop using pickup trucks- #2
edwardh1
| Posted in General Discussion on
What I was really asking in the other “pickup post” , based on my one trip to England, was- what changes in the building industry happenned in England to allow pickups to “almost dissappear” ??
for example, do suppliers do more delivery to the work site??? Many people here say “well I have to have a pickup because ……” but over there at $8 a gallon i saw very very few pickups , on interstates or in many small towns. Some covered vans and big tractor trailer rigs but almost no pickups
Has anyone on the forum worked in a place with really high gas prices?
Replies
I observed the same thing in France. There tradespeople mostly drive small panel trucks. Three conclusions:
1) They don't haul much in the way of materials - mostly gets delivered.
2) There seems to be more specialization, so they don't need to lug around 3 or 4 or 5 trades worth of tools.
3) The weather often sucks - those little panel trucks are really great at keeping things dry. They also may be more aerodynamic, though the way they drive them it doesn't seem like fuel efficiency is top of mind.
View ImageFord is going to be bring these in from Turkey. But they won'thave the same engine in North America.
Are we getting short changed?
hey say they are used everywhere in Turkey.
"Never pick a fight with an old man. If he can't beat you he will just kill you." Steinbeck
The van from Turkey is the Ford Transit connect, it is very popular in the UK and Europe, it is perfect for painters and service/repair guys.The van is great for city work and has the option of dual sliding doors, two wheel base lengths and two roof heights.They are on the small size but are cheap to run and buy.
I read that the diesel motor gets great mileage.
In the US they are going to a gas motor that doesn't get all that good mileage.
Think they might reconsider in light of recent events?
"Never pick a fight with an old man. If he can't beat you he will just kill you." Steinbeck
This was from bloomberg today:
GM Cuts More Truck Output, Adds Loan Discounts as Sales Slump
By Greg Bensinger
June 23 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp. reduced its North American truck production plan and added no-interest loans on many 2008 models after a consumer shift to cars contributed to a 16 percent drop in its U.S. sales through May.
GM this year will trim output of pickups, sport-utility vehicles and vans by an additional 170,000 this year, spokesman Tony Sapienza said today. The Detroit-based automaker also said that for the rest of this month it will offer the interest-free financing on loans of as long as six years.
The largest U.S. automaker's sales in its home market fell almost twice as much as the industry's 8.4 percent drop through last month, as GM's light-truck total slid 22 percent. Gasoline prices hovering around $4 a gallon in the U.S. have driven down GM's sales of large pickups and SUVs.
``No one knows where the bottom is in this sales environment,'' David Healy, an analyst at Burnham Securities Inc. in Sierra Vista, Arizona, said in an interview. ``GM has plenty to be worried about since they derive so much of their sales from these large trucks.'' .....
.....
The no-interest loan offer begins tomorrow, spokesman John McDonald said. GM also is raising prices by about $1,000, or an average 3.5 percent, on several 2009 models because of materials costs, currency exchange rates and new technology, he said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Bensinger in New York at [email protected]
"Never pick a fight with an old man. If he can't beat you he will just kill you." Steinbeck
Diesel is far better than gas, it used to be the case that diesels where loud, slow, dirty and unpopular, not anymore these days all my contractor buddy's are running diesels, as they are responsive, quiet and fast thanks to the turbo strapped to the side of it (the diesels that is, not the contractors, would take more than a turbo to speed some of those guys up).Our Renault station wagon has over the last 4 years averaged 42 MPG according to the onboard computer. Certainly would not get that return on a gas engine of the same size.
If they ever start making vans with real 4-wheel drive and a decent amount of ground clearance, I might consider switching to one from a pickup. It doesn't matter how much or little the vehicle can carry if it can't get to the site because of mud or snow.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not brought
low by this? For thine evil pales before that which
foolish men call Justice....
I am a carpenter / general contractor in London, England.Pick up trucks are used over here but tend to be seen as a fashion accessory as apposed to a tool, the trucks we have tend not to have beds longer than 6' (making then useless for anything but a mixer and a bucket of tools) and do you really need a 4x4 in London?I use a Nissan Primastar, cheap to buy £12-15,000 compared to £20-30,000 for a pick up. It has less toys on it but is cheaper to run.It takes loads to 9’6” in length, keeps my tools dry and safe from theft.I was in the US last summer and travelled from Boston up to Maine and Vermont and back via Rhode island and out there you do need 4x4 in the country, not so sure about the city’s but i was not there in the winter so do not know for sure. My wife is from Denmark and out there panel vans as in UK are the preferred type of transport for contractors, only difference being is that those guys use snow tyres in the winter.I personally would not consider a pick up as it is too small and cost too much to run.While I do have the van for dropping off my tools and equipment I do not have to worry as all our materials are delivered to site.
Thanks.
Your's was a useful post and did a great job of putting things in perspective.
JimNever underestimate the value of a sharp pencil or good light.
good post. Your English is pretty good too! ;)TFB (Bill)
Even on this side of the pond, there are places one doesn't need 4-wheel-drive. And there are places--notably in cities--where vans outnumber pickups 10 to 1 for carps & remodelers.
In cities, this makes sense. The worksites are on smaller lots and access is tighter so smaller vehicles work better. Rarely is a city job-site seriously sloped or muddy, so 4WD isn't as needed. And material delivery in urban areas tends to be a bit quicker than it can be in the country so there's less need for a vehicle that can haul materials as well as tools. Finally, a closed van is a safer way to carry tools in a place where anything left unwatched or unlocked will rapidly disappear. It's a lot easier to slam-lock a van door than it is to key-lock the door on a pickup cap.
In the country, however, it's different. New-construction jobsites are muddy, rutted and stump filled; frequently they are hacked out of the forest only weeks before the framers show up. Temporary access tracks up to them can be impassable in anything but a 4x4. (I visited one site the other day with a 300-foot-long 22% grade on loose dirt & gravel. The GC had to bring in a tow truck to winch the insulation sub's 25-foot box van up to the house. And the tow truck had had to winch itself up that hill first, LOL.)
There are fewer lumberyards and they cover much larger areas with fewer trucks; delivery for some parts of rural areas is scheduled only one or two days a week. It's important to have a way to haul materials needed to keep the job going.
There is also less chance someone walking by on the sidewalk--if there is one!--will look into the open back of a pickup and snatch a tool.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
I in 24 years has never needed 4wd, and I do dirt jobs, we have some fwd but the different bewteen a fwd and 2wd is twenty feet.
LOL, yeah 4wd gets ya 4 times as stuck too.Spheramid Enterprises Architectural Woodworks
Repairs, Remodeling, Restorations
"We strive for conversion,we get lost in conversation, and wallow in consternation. "Me.
2wd gets you stuck, 4wd gets you out ;)What kind of mileage do the little SUVs and crossovers get when you haul a decent load or are close to loaded all the time with tools? My wifes new 4Runner only gets about 22mpg and seems like we always are on empty due to the relatively small tank.Our other "town car" is an '06 F-350 crew cab - it gets 21mpg even on ULSD fuel. Way more grocery and kid seat space in the back seat plus 8' bed for all the stuff it takes to keep the ranch running...What is the net gain even if you get double the mileage if it takes two trips?
I have a GMC Allwheel drive van. about 13-14 MPG
The GMC 3500 2wd same milage but twice the hauling cap.
A F350 4 door duelly 460CID 4sp 4 bbl carb...7 MPG
I daily drive the one ton van, just makes the most sense to have it all under cover, and just steer clear of "what If I..." spots, I only got it stuck once ( so far) and that was stupidity and old habit from the AWD Safari ( that was impossible to get stuck).Spheramid Enterprises Architectural Woodworks
Repairs, Remodeling, Restorations
"We strive for conversion,we get lost in conversation, and wallow in consternation. "Me.
I tend to forget that there are fullsize trucks with gas engines...You couldn't force me to drive a gasser after being so spoiled with diesels for the last ten years...I'm not a big fan of Dodge trucks but a mechanical 12v Cummins is almost impossible to beat for mileage - but Dodges with those engines only ride well if you've got a 2 ton load at all times.
How does that Cummins do on fuel?I'm driving an '05 Silverado 2wd with the V6 and a five speed getting 17-18 in the city and 20-21 on the highway. With diesel at .70-.80 higher than unleaded, I'm happy to be pumping the latter. Once in a great while I find it a little underpowered for towing but I'm not hauling bobcat trailers or anything like that.Will I stop using a pickup? Only if a cargo van comes along that's as cheap to buy as the base model work truck and gets better gas mileage.
Most get 20+MPG - just hurts your body too much to ride in them. I personally like the Fords better. The Dodges seem to fall apart around the engine and the Fords seem to have better longevity as far as components go and with regular oil changes 250K is a given in my experience.I hear ya about the cost of diesel vs. gas - it is an even dollar higher out here
ptp
the Cummins diesel is by far the most fuel efficent diesel out there (as well as reliablity) towing with diesels is easy since they love to work hard!
However with Cummins you wind up with Dodge and I'm sorry Dodge simply doesn't have the reliability record that other trucks have managed to acquire.. Usually nothing serious or major just stuff that shouldn't fail is failing. Of all three truck lines the Dodge is by far the most noisey and gives you the poorest sense of solidarity..
Best gas mileage is with Chevy and both Ford and chevy are fighting hard to gain reliability. Causual conversation seems to indicate a slightly happier crowd owning the GM products with regard reliability and durability.. Nothing scientific, just an informal observation..
For actual Numbers check Consumer Reports
What kind of mileage are youz guys getting in the Cummins and Duramax trucks?
The Cummins motors are bulletproof, but Frenchy's right-Rams were falling apart around them. I think the newer Rams are built better, but YMMV.
I really like the Duramax/Allison combo in GM trucks, hardly ever saw them in the shop. Don't know what kind of mileage though.
deadman1,
My '99 cummins gets 16.5 mpg in normal stop/go conditions. Pulling my 14' cargo trailer to jobsites, and in the dead cold of winter it gets around 14 mpg. On long trips on the highway it gets 17.5 or better. It has high flow injectors in it(gives me ~55 more hp), and has 260k miles on it. A Dodge diesel tech told me the new Cummins will get 20mpg, but haven't talked with anyone who has one.
Last fall the truck was in the body shop(deer damage) and I rented a pickup. Turned out they gave me an '08 chevy with the duramax/allison combo. Tracked the mileage and couldn't do better than 14 mpg. Same driving conditions. I wasn't impressed.
Mitch
Wow, good stuff! Thanks!
Alot of my fear of the dodge cummins comes from the trans debacle of the late 90's with them. Someone at dodge should've realized that real deisels(like the cummins they had just started using) put out tons of torque, and their gas trannys wouldn't survive. One of the reasons I'm hot for the GM trucks is the Allison trans.
The Allison will outlast the truck and engine twice over - the head gasket not so much. GM did a typical truck engine gimmick and put an aluminum head on a iron block to save weight and seem high tech. Now you have dissimilar metals expanding at a diferent rate - makes the head gasket work twice as hard. Best case, you're radiator cap blows off. Worst case - your turbo enjoys a milkshake while the piston tries to compress water.Dodge and GM stake the reputations of their trucks on the quality of one component. Ford seems to have gotten by with an engine design that is slightly less reliable due to the fact the rest of the components are top notch and the chassis well design and suited for real work. GM IFS is another area where they cater to the Motor Trend readers rather than anyone who actually uses the trucks like they show in the commercials.Out here in Northern Nevada all the miners, drillers, utilities, etc use Fords primarily and Dodges to some extent - those trucks get used and abused and GM trucks simply don't hold up. 1/2 tons are not real trucks component wise either - they sell by price point and even Toyota has slipped in build quality latelyWhy can't we spec pickups like we spec OTR trucks - CAT, Detroit, Cummins, whatever you want.
Thanks Haystax,
I'm aware of the Duramax's aluminum head, but it's still more reliable than a powerstroke(although the new versions are pretty damn good). The cummins is bulletproof, but then there's the rest of the truck to contend with...
The GM IFS isn't awful, it rides the best -but is nowhere near as strong as the Ford or Dodge straight axles. Given that I won't be towing/hauling anywhere near max capacity or jumping it like the commercials, that's not a deal-breaker for me.
I definitely agree that 1/2 ton trucks should be categorized with cars. The Silverado 1500 should have El Camino badges.
MRockwell,
that information is backed up with the theory of engines.. six cylinders has less friction and rotating mass than a 8 cylinder..
Because the pistons can be smaller and the stroke shorter and still yield the same power a V8 offers the potential for greater power ultimately but added power requires added fuel.
Thus if your goal is maximum power a V8 configuartion is superior but then a V 12 is superior to a V8 so how much power do you want?
I have the Duramax/Allison on a one ton Chevy dump dually.I have gotten 20MPG going 55 on the highway, but that is rare. I live on an island where top speed is 45 in a couple places, I plow and haul trailers much of the time, so I get about ten MPG generally. I know tao other guys with same setup in regular or crew cabs and they get 18-20 MPG regularly
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Excellent, thanks!
Forgot to include that all of these are 4x4s
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Thanks again, and while I gotcha on the hook...any reliability issues?
All with less than 40K miles but everyone thinks of them as bulletproof. Only negative comment I've heard is don't go more than 15K before changing the fuel filter or it will leave you walking.Nothing slows it down hauling a load.This is ten times the truck that GM tryed to call a diesel back in the eighties. That wwas the converted gas engine and the tranny ( 450?) that would constantly search when in town around 30-40MPH, overheating the tranny. The engine would only start when you were lucky, leak oil, and didn't really perform They got this one right IMO
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Yeah, those were the good old days...for mechanics! The 6.2l and 6.5l gm diesels were god-awful loads of junk.
They should have sold them with a half dozen spare injector pumps, and an extra dual-mass flywheel.
Thanks for the feedback!
I've driven and worked on some, but living with it is a whole nother ballgame.
What kind of mileage do the little SUVs and crossovers get when you haul a decent load or are close to loaded all the time with tools? My wifes new 4Runner only gets about 22mpg and seems like we always are on empty due to the relatively small tank. I'm driving a Forrester, it gets 30 on the highway and never goes
below 25. The range is usually somewhere around 300 miles.
.
As far as getting stuck, This is my first AWD vehicle and I'm
impressed.
I've had plenty of 4WD and they just don't compare. The Subaru has
posy. on the front and the back, not to mention front to back.
As far as getting stuck, This is my first AWD vehicle and I'm impressed.I've had plenty of 4WD and they just don't compare
That's because most folks don't put it into 4wd until after their stuck! AWD is nothing more than full time 4wd.
No, AWD is different then 4wd.
Lots of different systems but if we compare what I have (base model)
to a run of the mill 4WD set up it's easy to talk about.
4WD is a fifty fifty split front to rear (power wise). Whith a differential to allow turning etc.
Thus you in effect have two wheels propelling at any given moment.
Positraction help greatly, but we were talking basic set ups.
AWD is all four wheels propelling until one wheel slips. Then the
power is shifted to the other side or in the case of Subaru the other
side and or front to back.
We've all been stuck in a pick up with one front wheel and one
rear wheel spinning away haven't we?
As far as I know the only way to get beyond that with a true 4WD
is to have a locking differential. Then good luck steering!
I hate to break it to ya, but 4wd is also all 4 wheels driving until one slips. And keep in mind that there are alot of AWD systems out there, not just Subaru.
Subaru's "...wheels that slip to the wheels that grip" slogan is for the most part just that. A slogan
In order for that to be truly functional, they would have to engage a locker or apply the brakes on the slipping wheel to divert torque away from it. They don't -it's just marketing. They have not cornered the market on traction control.
What they have done, (and in only late model year automatic-equipped Subs, and not in the preceding 30 years of production) is put an active limited slip diff between the front and rear driveshafts. This enables the TCM to prevent either driveshaft from spinning up, the same way it works in a single axle. It will not however, keep that single wheel from still spinning and expending a sizable amount of the torque sent to that respective axle(whatever that axle's diff will allow). Maybe..."from the end that slips to the end that kinda grips"?
They do use limited slip diffs in the axles which passively help greatly. But so do most 4wd's. However many AWD's did/do not, which essentially makes them simply full time 4wd.
Now don't get me wrong, especially as a retired dealer master tech for Subaru and 12 other badges, I love Subarus. They're incredibly overbuilt, and handle very well at that.
I've had dozens of Legacy wagons and sedans on lifts that had 300k+ miles and still ran like a watch. I can't say the same thing about any other car/truck I've worked on.
The next new car for us if we stayed in NJ would have been a Forester, but not out here.
Heck, with lockers ya steer with the throttle!
So, what are you driving in AZ?
"Never pick a fight with an old man. If he can't beat you he will just kill you." Steinbeck
Lol, a gas guzzling, 1998 4wd 3/4ton suburban. It's exactly what I wanted at the time...big block, 4l80e trans, and 3/4t suburbans essentially have 1ton suspensions. We like to go off the beaten path and needed a 4wd. My wife would've gotten the Forester if we were still in NJ, now she's got a 2006 Stratus.
Shopping for a new truck now...can't decide what to do.
The 'burban does double-duty as work and personal(carries either 8 people comfortably or 8' sheet goods), and will pull anything I hook it to. I hate to give up any of those!
I run a small(ok, tiny) custom cabinet/handyman business and a commercial prop maint company, comm business has been better than cabs, so I don't really need the 8' capacity anymore per se. But...ya never know which way the worm'll turn...
I may just get a dedicated work van, and make the 'burban into a dedicated pleasure barge...gotta work out parking arrangements. Damn HOA's!
3/4 ton 4x4 suburbans are not all that common either.
better hang on to it
"Never pick a fight with an old man. If he can't beat you he will just kill you." Steinbeck
I just might at that. After selling our house in NJ I had money in the bank waiting for the right truck...took almost a month to find one that wasn't selling at twice it's real value.
One thing I failed to consider: Greenhouse on wheels+118 degrees in July.
Well I trust your experience as a mechanic wholly.
First off my point was they are not the same, and they are not.
Second what you say is true as far as my vehicle (manual tranny with
two limited slip differentials) but only mine.
A search of Subaru's shameless marketing division :) will
reveal several systems that do indeed monitor and direct power to
the appropriate wheel.
As far as their system being the same with in effect two wheels
providing the drive, I'll not argue they can.
http://www.drive.subaru.com/SubaruDrive-Sum02/AWD-Demystified.asp
All of this will be a mute point when traction control becomes
standard on all vehicles. 2010 I think it is. Anyhow, I had to pull a 3/4 ton dodge out of the snow this winter.
4/4 with no positraction just doesn't cut it. To me that is the real
thing to be learned- you must have a limited slip differential to
be effective.
Anyhow, I had to pull a 3/4 ton dodge out of the snow this winter.
Not being a good driver has more to do with the getting stuck quotient than most will admit. I've had both 4x4 and awd vehicles and I always carry a tow strap. Both to help others and to help others help me. http://grantlogan.net
Who got Bo Diddley's money?
when we lived in TX and spend each weekend camping on the beach I also carried straps and regularily pulled 4x4's outta the sand ...
with the wife's front wheel drive Olds Calais
to it's credit it had huges tires ... all 16" of them ... and really wide ... maybe 55 series
at the time ... pretty radical!
similar to this one ...
View Image
'cept hers was all white.
great litte car ...
anyways .... wide tires aired down a bit on the sand ...
and not driving like an idiot ... kept us from being stuck in a ditch.
so Yep ... that little FWD pulled 4x4's outta the sand about once every other weekend ... and no way would I try to say that it outperformed 4x4 in any way!
Jeff Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
I couldn't agree more.
This was just a case of traction tho. The driveway at the jobsite
is a fairly good climb to get out. so from a dead stop on snow uphill
it was easy to go nowhere.
i'll drink to that not being a good driver having something to do with it, i have driven my 2WD tercel across streams and over rocks that got lots of others in 4WD stuck cause they were wimps.
you have to be aggressive, just don't exceed your limits. and you don't know what your limits are until you exceed them!
Unfortunately, 4/5 sytems(?) they offer are simply sexy names for having limited slip diffs in various places, or not. The same as can be found in any axle, but with a catchier slogan.
Another point I missed yesterday: AWD and most modern 4wd systems use a differential between the front and rear driveshafts which allows them to spin at different rates -good for dry handling, bad for slop as it will allow all of the torque from both driveshafts to be lost to 1 spinning wheel(like the truck you helped out).
Some AWDs use a limited slip diff here to eliminate that. Subaru and some others go so far as to use an active limited slip to essentially lock the drivshafts together so that cannot happen. This effectively recreates the "Lock" position found on 4wd transfer cases from the 70s thru 90s(notably the np203 in chevy, ford &dodge)
Absolutely...for 4wd to work very well, a limited slip or locker (or 2)is a must. The factory lockers(GMs gov-loc, and Ford's version are a joke) There are plenty of good passive limited slips available, most are under $400/$600 -installed.
You certainly are the man to ask so here goes...
I've heard the hype about the boxer engines being smoother and
allowing for a lower center of gravity etc.. So why do so
few companies use them?
Porsche and Subaru, but not to many others. Well BMW motor cycles
of course, but hardly any body else.
One answer I've gotten is production costs. That's confusing to me,
why would it cost that much more to make that particular configuration?
Two heads? but a V-twin has two also right?
Henley,
A boxer is not the most compact engine configuration. Nor is it inherantly balanced..
The only inherantly balanced engine configuartion is a V12. Even an inline six has a secord order harmonic that is taken out with balancing aides like harmonic balancers and phased crankshaft counter weight..
In Line six's are in all of those million mile diesel engines But the only truely balanced engine is a 60 degree V12 (expense is the only reason they aren't more common)
I don't claim to know much about engine design heck I
know next to nothing, but the horizontally opposed cylinders
are often purported to be inherently balanced.
As I said engine design isn't my thing. So why would the greater number of cylinders balance a V12 as opposed to a V6? Also, I can see how a V12 would cost more to manufacture, but
it still leaves me in the dark as to why the Boxer is so unpopular.
Is it the size as you mentioned? Sports cars are often compact and
Subaru's are certainly small vehicles.
Henley.
Whew! Trying to consolidate years of study on engine design in simple understandable few sentences.
OK. The mass of a piston and rod assembly is counterbalanced in a boxer configuration.. however!
The piston doing the work. The the third stroke of a 4 stroke engine puts unequal thrust on the crankshaft, That's the imbalance point..
In line engines use counterweights in the crankshaft in order to deal with the imbalance. It achieves the same effect, dealing with the mass is relatively simple.. the issue is dealing with the thrust of the piston in the firing position..
Let me back up here for a moment to ensure we're on the same page. I'm not trying to insult. Just want to make sure we're connected.
There are four strokes in a four stroke engine..
Intake, (piston goes down creating a vacuum sucking air and fuel in){1st 180degrees of crankshaft rotation}
Compression, (Piston goes up compressing the mixture) {second 180degrees of crankshaft rotation}
Power/firing,( Fuel is ignited driving piston down) {3rd 180 degrees of crankshaft rotation}
Exhaust (piston goes up forcing spent exhaust out) { fourth 180 degrees of crankshaft rotation}
The load on those pistons is relatively minor compared to the force of the burning fuel.. that's the real load (that's what drives the car ahead, the real work) and that load needs something to balance it.
So every power stroke requires 2 complete crankshaft rotations for a total of 4320 degrees of crankshaft rotation for a 6 cylinder engine.. or 5760 degrees for a V8.
By phasing the strokes at the right point we can get a six cylinder to have a piston firing at opposite ends of the crankshaft to balance the other firing stroke. The only trouble is there is a second order harmonic developed which is taken care of by the vibration dampner and mass of the engine..
V8's have a much worse 2nd order harmonic and only 60 degree V12's can eliminate the second order harmonic completely.
I understand how complex this subject is. It's worse than playing multilevel chess.
You have to think phasing and inertia plus keep in mind the 4 strokes of the power cycle.
No worries, I have the imaginary people on the screen
can't offend me policy. I do understand the workings of an internal combustion engine, that
much I got.
Let me try an oversimplified analogy to see if I got the rest-
The v12 is like a Node when talking about a standing wave?
A quiet spot in the midst of the vibrations.
Henley
Short answer, yes!
One of the tricks with Jaguars V12 was the ability to balance a nickle on the engine when it's running..
Production expense, maintenance expense, reliability, size(packaging), weight.
I am going to respectfully disagree on the v12 vs other designs balance issue.
First, verbage: Balance= counterweight balancing of internal components, so that the reciprocating mass does not by itself induce vibration into itself. EG: Pistons moving at 4,000fps generated one heck of a directional load on the crankshaft, this is offset by a counterweight so the crank loading is neutral.
Harmonics: Vibrations set up in the crankshaft mass by either a basic unbalance, or a staggered firing order(as in a v-motor), which cause the crankshaft to rotate unevenly. These can be fatal if the frequency of vibration approaches the crankshaft's resonant frequency, causing the crank to fail.
Simply put(yeah, right): The more cylinders you have to work with, the more cylinders you have to time the power strokes, the more smoothly you can turn the crankshaft. Essentially, each piston pushes on the crank at different times...the more pushes, the more each rotation of the crank is broken up into smalller pushes, the smoother the crank turns. This helps avoid, but does not eliminate harmonics, and still requires a harmonic dampener, as you will find on any v12.
Neither boxer's nor v-12s eliminate harmonics by any means other than a harmonic dampener. And while the v-12 allows for better overall balance due to the number of cylinders and their placement, they are still subject to harmonics, and will also benefit from internal counterweight balancing.
EDIT: While I was typing this up, you were posting above and I don't think we're that far apart anyway!
Edited 6/25/2008 12:14 pm ET by deadman1
deadman,
See you're making the classic mistake that so many do.. it's not the static weight of pistons moving up and down that sets up harmonics..
The problem is the thrust of the piston during the firing cycle.
It is only possible to have one piston in 4 firing due to a 4 stroke motor. If those pistons are at opposite ends of the crankshaft in either a six cylinder or 8 cylinder configuration, a rocking motion is set up (second order harmonics)
Only with a 60 degree V12 configuration can 4 pistons be firing at the same time to equally balance all of the harmonics.
I'm with you in theory, but v12s do not fire 4 cylinders at the same time. They fire 6 per crankshaft revolution, and none at the same time.
I'm tellin ya, it's the # of cylinders and how evenly spaced they are throughout the cycle that gives it such good balance(not harmonics as cancelled by a dampener, that's in the metal itself. Balance gives us the rocking motion to the crank and therefore the engine itself.)
They are smoother and the inherent balance in the design allows for extremely low crankshaft and bearing wear, resulting in very high mileage. As opposing cylinders fire, the loads are distributed to the crankshaft bearings 180degrees apart-essentially using the entire bearing area, and cancels out it's own vibrations which eliminates the need for large crankshaft counterweights, which cost power to spin. In inline or V motors(yes, including v12s), the loads from the crankshaft are absorbed by 20-60% of the bearing surface area.
As I see it, the boxer design can be prohibitve to production because: Boxer design requires a split engine block(cases)-more expensive for production/assembly, and it is very wide compared to inline 4s -it doesn't lend itself well to transverse mounting for FWD. Also, V motors stagger the cylinder placement so more cylinders can be packaged in a shorter height engine than an inline. A boxer by design will be shorter in height and length than either V or inline designs of the same cylinder number, but by laying the cylinders flat it takes up a trendous amount of width.
Thanks that makes sense.
by laying the cylinders flat it takes up a trendous amount of width. I guess that's why it's $150.00 to change the sparkplugs ;)
I have an '88 BMW 325iX with all wheel drive. They sold them here in the US from 1988-1991 (the 325xi that came along in the late 90s was a different animal.) The transfer case has a torque sensing differential set up so under normal conditions the torque is divided 37% front, 63% rear, but as much as 90% of the torque can be sent either to the front or rear if necessary. It's pretty much unstoppable in the snow, at least until it gets so deep that the wheels can't touch the ground any more.
They did build a station wagon version, but unfortunately it was never sold in the US. I'd like to import one from Europe in a couple of years once they're 25 years old (so it wouldn't have to be Federalized to meet US emissions and safety standards.)
Yeah, it's the same type of setup as subaru...a limited slip diff between the driveshafts(front/rear output sections). Subarus distribute torque at about the same ratios too(60-40 f-r, up to maybe 30-70 f-r IIRC). I don't recall if the older BMWs were actively controlled, but I'm thinking no.
Either way it does work extremely well, no argument there!
We've all been stuck in a pick up with one front wheel and one rear wheel spinning away haven't we?
No, cause I won't waste money on 4WD and not go the distance and get a locking rear axle.
Then line between AWD and 4WD is too blurred by marketing. TRUE AWD would require computer control or a Viscous coupling or two.
My Explorer has:
4 Wheel Auto: When the computer sense a difference in wheel speed between front and rear wheels it automatically engages 4 Hi so long as you are under a certain road speed.
4 HI: Just what it sounds like, 4HI
4 LO: Same deal.
Now, I can get an Explorer or Mountaineer with "AWD" but all it really is, is transfer case with 2 Hi and 4 Wheel Auto. It's not true AWD, it just kicks into 4 HI when the wheels are turning at different speeds.
Thats just 4 Wheel Auto with a spiffy AWD badge on the back.
A lot of simple AWD's are front wheel drive but have a prop shaft and Viscous coupling. In simple terms a differential filled with a fluid that heats up with friction and becomes thicker. That way if the front and rear wheels start spinning at wildly different speeds, the fluid heats up, thickens and locks up the coupling much the same way a torque converter locks up. That powers the rears until the wheels have all spun the same speed for a minute or two and it cools enough to unlock.
I'd rather have a transfer case myself.
I'd rather have a transfer case myself.
I had a Bravada with AWD. While it did fine in snow, I never really taxed it like I do the P/Us I've had. In every truck I've owned with a transfer case including my current one, the axles bind up on dry pavement in 4H or 4L. This tells me all wheels are grabbing. Am I wrong in my thinking? Recently, when towing a Land Rover out of a stuck in the mud situation, I seemed to be slinging mud with all 4 wheels.http://grantlogan.net
"I could have had Miss September...... I couuld have had Miss May. I could have had Miss November, but I waited for December....." ZZ Top.
The inner and outer wheels need to spin at different speeds in order for the truck to turn.
That's harder when it's in 4 hi or 4 lo because everything is mechanically connected. So, the inside wheel usually binds a little.
Plus if you bought a real heavy duty work truck, it may have locking diffs front and rear. That will make it bind even more. Probably why you see all four wheels spinning.
My 2006 Chevy silverado has a Locking diff in the rear. Sometimes in the rain when the wheels spin and the diff locks, it doesn't unstick right away. Makes for fun in a wet parking lot when the front wheels want the truck to turn but the rears want to push it straight.
Yeah were on the same page here. With out the rear locking out your
in trouble.
While it's true the lines are getting blurred, I think it's safe
to say for true off roading your right-Transfer case with hi/low.
For real world driving tho the AWD has it's advantages.
Mainly it's always on. For those unexpected moments when you
actually need it. Not to mention it handles better in general.
It seams to me if the system was sturdy enough most truck
drivers these day's would be served well by AWD.
Lets face it the guy's here are in the minority when it comes
even needing a truck, and most of us just need to get in and out
of the job sights.
Let alone most of the people cruisin around who never even use
their trucks and don't have a clue how to stay on the road in the snow.
A little preventive maintenance would be a good thing for most
of them.
Actually, viscous coupling is just that...coupled by viscous fluid. It's a limited slip without the wearable plates, just like any A/Ts torque converter. Viscous fluid of any type thins with temperature allowing more slip, not less.
It used to be a regular occurence to replace them when the fluid was worn out and became too thin. If you put a new unit in a vise, you need a breaker bar to turn it. The used up one you can turn in your hands.
You're spot on about all the various "Auto 4wds" being just rwd with the computer engaging the front driveshaft as needed.
Viscous coupling relies on rare fluids (non-Newtonian or dilatant) that become nearly solid with heating and shear forces (rather than becoming less viscous with heating like most fluids):http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viscous_coupling_unit
Read the sources to that Wikipedia blurb. Wikipedia is not exactly the pinnacle of accuracy.
It's the resistance to shear forces that is relevant to operation. Not heating of the fluid.
If the unit/fluid was activated by heat you would have 1 or the other attending situations:
A) If the unit was sensitive enough to react quickly to changes in speed(minute temperature changes) it would take forever to cool and disengage, especially considering it's housed in a 200degree drivetrain.
B) If it was able to cool and release at normal operating temps, it would have to allow a tremendous amount of slip, to generate enough heat to activate it.
Remember again, this is a 10 pound solid mass of viscous fluid and steel, inside a 200 degree housing. It's thermal mass and it's environment make rapid minute temp changes impossible.
In a nutshell:
Yes, temperature makes the visco fluid more viscous, but it does not make it viscous to start with.
A worn unit will need heat to become viscous enough to function, but a normal unit functions cold. Heating of the fluid through fluid shearing is secondary, and not required for operation.
EDIT: If we take the temperature mode of operation one step further: If by design -shear caused fluid heating which activated more viscosity, which in turn created more shear forces to slow the plates, it would eventually(and rapidly) become a locker. The second it cooled enough to allow the plates to slip, more shear....locker again.
EDIT again!: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5332515.html -Viscous coupling fluid designed to maintain set viscosity despite temp changes.
I'm not going to waste your time with the 20 or so links I found to support my argument, but I will say that the http://www.synchro.org VW Vanagon website that is quoted in Wikipedia is the only one I could find making the assumption that fluid heat was required for operation. Way to go Wikipedia!
Edited 6/26/2008 12:09 pm ET by deadman1
Edited 6/26/2008 12:21 pm ET by deadman1
hope the economy here keeps up as i just picked up my new F150 xlt all tricked out new truck the other day
some neat is the back up camera as i tow a lot alone mostly
the neatest one on the lot was a 350 with the harley davidson package and diezel engine list $ 70,000 all in black except for my drool marks
a man has needs
a good quote i once read : Ive been rich and poor rich is better !
"What is the net gain even if you get double the mileage if it takes two trips?"
Been debating that in my head for awhile. Currently drive a 2wd Ranger 4 cylinder/5 speed manual. Economical to operate, 25 to 27 mpg on the highway (used to get better until they started with the ethanol blends) , went 100,000 miles on the original tires , still on the original brakes but the lack of space shows up time to time. Hard pressed to get my miter saw/stand, jobsite saw/stand and other equipment all in at the same time. It can be done but it's ends up like a Rubik's cube and looks like Jethro and Granny comming down the road and the tool/ fastener I need inevitably winds up at the bottom of the heap. There's been several times I've made an extra trip back to the jobsite to get my stuff. Been considering an '08 F-150 reg cab 2wd 8' box 6 cyl. 20mpg highway so they say. Lots of space behind the seat for tools and I'd actually be able to tow something and enough payload to get that free manure I've been offered. Worried though that operating costs will kill me- still crunching numbers. Do a lot of driving- last job was out of state (over 1000 miles round trip). Next one is closer- only 68 miles each way. There are some really good deals out there on full size trucks but I don't want to shoot myself in the foot either.
Edited 6/23/2008 10:21 am ET by jc21
jc21
I had the same debate when I bought mine Previously bought S10's but I tried a short box regular cab pickup and I must say it impressed me.. The slight reduction in gas mileage has more than been made up by the load I can carry..
If you buy a extended cab or crew cab the mileage drops into the toilet (added weight) . The 8 foot bed makes finding a spot for parking a chore, and U-turns turn into something so difficult you drive out of your way rather than hold up traffic while you make a three point turn where a short box can just simply whip a U.
I would estimate that my mileage dropped 3 MPG with the full size short box regular cab The same truck with extended cab abd long box is another 6 or 7 miles pergallon less.
I like Ford's regular cab- more space than GM's behind the seat and it has four doors for easier access and bed has more volume. Downside is that it's more difficult to reach in the bed with the higher bed sides. The '09 150's fix that with an optional tailgate step and optional side steps. They do away with extra doors on the regular cab though and I'm sure they'll cost lots more than the current '08's. GM's seem to have a bit better mpg, especially on the V-8's. It's a tough call for me. Ranger is paid for but I'm at the point (108,000 miles) where I need either put some money into the Ranger (brakes -still original! and rear axle seals, a/c clutch, tuneup and possibly a clutch later in the year) or spring for a new vehicle. We've been plenty busy but in this uncertain economy who know's how long it will last.
jc21
Here's my take on maintinance on trucks.. I keep a vehicle untill three months repair bills equal or are greater than the cost of payments on a new one..
I have 287,000 miles on my pickup and Have a great deal of trust in it.. I would hop in it today and drive anyplace in the country.. (well maybe not Hawaii, I'm nort sure it would float)<grin>
I haven't spent a $1000 on repairs other than ruetine stuff.. oil changes tires etc. That's a lot less than payments would be.. I've been payment free for 7 years now and that money allows me to do a lot of things I wouldn't otherwise be able to afford. I figure I've saved well in excess of $30,000 in payments. The truck would sell today for what the dealer would have given me for it 5 years ago so I haven't depreciated anything..
It still looks nice.
Rough estimate of the cost of all the delayed maintinace on your truck is around $1500. Compare that against the cost of payments for say another 4 or 5 years.. We're talking some really big savings aren't we?
That is the same logic I use on comparing repair costs and payments. I have a `96 Aerostar van. The only thing that doesn't work on it is the cruise control. The V-6 gets decent mileage, but transmissions are suspect. I rebuilt it once in 150,000 miles and cannot imagine why I did not convert it to standard.
John
But you are a flatlander;)
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I recently purchased a used Toyota Echo. I still have a full sized pickup but I only use it when I need it. We will be starting a new job that requires more drive time and I think that the little car will pay for itself in a couple of years and that will extend the life of the truck that much longer.
It will require more planning but this new job is 30 miles from the nearest lumber yard and I would have to plan more in advance in any case. I am already enjoying the $40 it takes to fill the tank instead of the $120 my truck takes.
BTW, the Echo is FWD and the pickup is 2WD and I don't expect to have any trouble next winter. I do carry chains in the truck but use them less than once a winter.
Edited 6/23/2008 9:46 pm ET by Schelling
In 2000 I bought a long bed V6 Toyota Tundra for $16,000 out the door. What you are paying is much more than what pickups cost in the U.S.
When i was in the US last year i could not believe how cheap your trucks are, was thinking of buying one and exporting it back home, until the wife reminded me that i was getting carried away and that parts, steering wheel on wrong side and cost of filling up with gas, meant it was not so worth while.We found you guys also pay a lot less for power tools, so she let me fill the suitcase with those instead.Hoping to go to US next year, will bring extra suitcase.
My brother worked for Toyota as a mechanic and he told me that he worked on a Tundra that had over 400,000 miles on it. My Camry has 204,000 miles on it and has never had the brakes changed. Today I had struts put on it for the first time. I have only changed the starter contacts and boots for the CV joints along with the typical batteries, tires, etc.
If they ever start making vans with real 4-wheel drive and a decent amount of ground clearance
http://www.quigley4x4.com/
My D-wall guy has got a couple of these in a Ford diesel. High teens for miliage.....Naive but refreshing !
Yeah, but for me to pay an additional 10 grand for the 4WD add-on package, the OPP of the van itself would have to be 10 grand lower than the price of a comparable pickup.
It ain't.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
In Japan, the typical tradesman drives a tiny microvan with
660cc 3-or-4 cylinder engine, with roof rack. Or else a 660 cc
micro pickup truck with a rack setup that allows leaning odd
lots of the lumber up against the cab and down at the tailgate.
These micro vehicles are very inexpensive to own and operate.
Of course most materials are delivered to the jobsite
just-in-time and craned into place.
they been selling them micro pickups here lately
With the turbocharger and four speed stick,
they are actually quite snappy to drive.
I'll stand by my truck, which is a toyota tundra. I use a 6x10 trailer for my tools which suites the type of work I do just fine... general repair and remodeling. And I routinely have to engage the 4 wheel drive when backing it up a steep driveway. My last truck didn't have the 4x4 and I often had to settle for parking on the street.