Common Rail Diesels - Experience

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by Dieseldude

...................
.....................
Cruise control is non essential equipment that I do not need. Without use of throttle control, I think that drivers can become drowsy, and cruise control is a danger.

.....

I was nodding agreement with everything before and after this one.


CC in a car is like an autopilot on the the boat. To me.


My right leg is still sore from a cross country trip in the early 70s in my VW bug before cc. One year we were coming back from a ski trip to Colorado back to NY in a VW bus, and I rigged up a broomstick to apply constant pressure to the accelerator pedal all across Nebraska on Route 80. Worked great.


In 2016 my AP failed off Newport, hand steered to BC.


Reminded me of those trips.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

...In 2016 my AP failed off Newport, hand steered to BC...

My windvane has no electronics

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by wingssail

My windvane has no electronics

I hear ya. But I'm "just" a coastal cruiser.

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by wingssail

My car is entirely controlled by computer and while I love that car (2002 luxury model) it is so electronically controlled and linked, and so old that parts are no longer available, that I think it is likely that a future electronic failure will be unfixable and could force an otherwise perfect car to be scrapped.

It almost already happened. The power seat module is interconnected with the computer system and when the seats failed the car could not be operated. Further the power seat system could not even be removed because it could not be moved to allow the bolts to be exposed, AND replacement parts are no longer available anyhow! Well I got it out (barely) and found a used module 3000 miles away in a wrecking yard and it is all fixed now. I'm happy but it is only a matter of time.

Boats could be headed this direction. In the late 90's Jim Clark's remarkable new sailboat, the 155-foot computer controlled Hyperion, was be christened after many software related delays but at the last moment he still had to debug some of the software that was written for the boat. Even then the problems continued. They set out to cross the Atlantic with a team of programmers on board working at desks in a computer room below yet even with these experts on board the system failed time after time and the problems prevented them from running engines on board or controlling the sails.

Well things are better now but I am still skeptical of too much electronic control on my boat.

Manufacturers are setting up buyers for needless electronic failures and costs. Otherwise good vehicles and machinery is being tossed over computer and electronic faults.I'm all for keeping things simple. We do not need rocket science in boats and vehicles.

[bclaude]

My sailing boat is equipped with a YANMAR 6BY3 which is based on the 3.0L BMW Diesel engine and of course it has common rail. My prior boat had a traditional Volvo Penta that never missed a beat and like many I was nervous about the added complexity of an electronically controlled engine. I drove a 3.0L BMW diesel with the same engine for 200,000 miles and loved how that engine performed which made me a bit more comfortable to have the same block on my boat. The fact is that traditional diesel are a rapidly disappearing breed that we like it or not. My wife and I completed a navigation around the world and our YANMAR and have clocked close to 3,000h on it and so far it has been running flawlessly. Early on, within the first 200h I had a defective injector and that was quickly addressed by YANMAR under warranty but other than that we have had zero issues. Other than better burn and mileage the benefit of common rail is a smooth running engine without the typical knocking of old diesels and much less vibration once the engine is warm. My YANMAR is so quiet at idle that I have occasionally forgotten to turn it off for a while. As was mentioned before, clean fuel is THE most important thing to keep an eye on to avoid issues. I have rigged a fuel polisher using a Racor with a 10 micron filter and a fuel pump constantly rotating the fuel in my tank. After each refuel I let my polisher run non stop for 2/3 days non stop to make sure any water/debris would be taken out. I am also very careful in the selection of refueling stations. In addition I have another racor with a 2 micron duel filter ahead of the 2 micron fuel filter on the engine. The racor filter elements are cheap to replace and easy to check for cleanliness. As someone else mentioned it is also key to keep the bilge dry to avoid any corrosion in the electrical connectors. One benefit of common rail is that if they ever run out of fuel they are easy to restart as opposed to the traditional diesels requiring the loosening of the injectors. YANMAR is not as good as Volvo Penta as far as parts are concerned but I had an arrangement with a dealer to FedEx me any required part in the event something went wrong. Other than a ton of fuel filters and regular maintenance parts, the only spare I took with me around the world was an injector and it is still sitting in my spare bin. I should also add that my 6BY2 is compatible with Regular OBD readers (the OBD adapter cable can be purchased form YANMAR). . I purchased an OBD reader recommended by YANMAR and can diagnose any issue on my own without the need for a special computer. This is a key advantage over Volvo. Hope this helps.

[bcboomer]

Originally Posted by Dieseldude

Manufacturers are setting up buyers for needless electronic failures and costs. Otherwise good vehicles and machinery is being tossed over computer and electronic faults.I'm all for keeping things simple. We do not need rocket science in boats and vehicles.

There is no conspiracy to set up customers for needless expense.
Manufacturers are competing for customers.
99% of the new car buyers want convenience and luxury.
Whoever offers the most of both at the best price tends to sell more cars.
If buyers didn't want the conveniences there would not be any controllers except the engine one.

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by bcboomer

There is no conspiracy to set up customers for needless expense.
Manufacturers are competing for customers.
99% of the new car buyers want convenience and luxury.
Whoever offers the most of both at the best price tends to sell more cars.
If buyers didn't want the conveniences there would not be any controllers except the engine one.

If there is no conspiracy, then why are manufacturers all doing the same things? My experience with Caterpillar speaks of the neglect and abuse that is typical of how manufacturers of electronic engines abuse customers. Most vehicle buyers have little to no understanding of the technology and the needless failures, complications, and expenses that it can cause. People who are ignorant are easy bait for the deception of modern marketing. If manufacturers would provide a 100% lifetime warranty on all electronic components of their engines and vehicles, perhaps they would begin to make themselves responsible to customers. Since electronics are supposedly so much more reliable than mechanical systems, such a warranty should not be a financial burden. But this is not likely to happen, as we know that electronic failures are not uncommon, and when manufactures have to assume the costs, they will suffer large losses.

[waterman46]

Originally Posted by bcboomer

Your power windows don't have a safety that stops it from crushing kid's fingers, your power locks don't automatically lock/unlock with speed, your cruise control and daytime running lights do have control modules. Built in backup cameras do things like lower the radio volume and adjust the mirrors.

The manufacturers put these in because the buyers want them.

The backup camera does not lower the mirrors or reduce the radio volume. Putting transmission in reverse is what sends the signal to do all of that. And it's easier for the design and production if all of those sensor and activation signal wires terminate in a computer rather than creating separate circuits, relays or solid state switches for each function.


As an aside, I rented little diesel cars in Europe a couple years ago, and did lots of driving there. I was amazed at how clean and fuel efficient that car was. I don't know if there are any such diesel cars sold in American marketplace. Why not?

[bcboomer]

Originally Posted by waterman46

The backup camera does not lower the mirrors or reduce the radio volume. Putting transmission in reverse is what sends the signal to do all of that. And it's easier for the design and production if all of those sensor and activation signal wires terminate in a computer rather than creating separate circuits, relays or solid state switches for each function.

Yes, of course it is the body controller


As an aside, I rented little diesel cars in Europe a couple years ago, and did lots of driving there. I was amazed at how clean and fuel efficient that car was. I don't know if there are any such diesel cars sold in American marketplace. Why not?

It's been tried in Canada and the US but buyers were not interested. Volkswagen et al didn't help when they cheated on the emissions/fuel economy/performance process.

[Shaneesprit]

Originally Posted by BrightAyes

I am considering repowering my sail boat which has a Yanmar 4JH3-TE diesel. I note all the new engines are computor controled common rail injection.
It appears some of these engines have been in service for about 5 years and I am wondering about the reliability of these engines. Any wisdom?

So I am very familiar with engine types, now I would never put a common rail in a boat, Electronics are generally good and even if there is a problem they are probably still going to run in a limp home mode, and he’ll they are much easier to diagnose faults, however they only run on the cleanest of diesel fuel, and they can be very temperamental, and expensive to repair.
Pressures in the fuel system of 180,000 PSI
Pressures like that can be very dangerous, also the cleanliness with working on the fuel system is at particulate level.
I wouldn’t even run a diesel car - of course 99.5% of the time they are fine, but I have been around a bit and seen some very expensive examples of failure.
1) six month old Van put the correct fuel in at gas station and water in fuel light came on, drove directly to the nearest dealership, cost £3500 New injectors & new manifolds required. Weeks off the road.
2) car went in for service had its fuel filter changed, and wouldn’t start at the dealer, manufacturer came out, couldn’t sort it, Bosch came out and it left on a trailer.
3) Engineer changed a fuel pressure sensor not a car engine, fuel was not particle cleaned, fuel pump then failed. No warranty due to the first repair- Very expensive.
Mechanical Engine for me, although I do prefer the Electronics, just not the common rail.

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by waterman46

.......................
.........................

As an aside, I rented little diesel cars in Europe a couple years ago, and did lots of driving there. I was amazed at how clean and fuel efficient that car was. I don't know if there are any such diesel cars sold in American marketplace. Why not?

I believe it is the market. Like the people who are buying the cars = the market.


F150s aren't all that common in Europe, are they? There's a reason for that, I'd bet. Yet once you get a little ways outside a US city, they're all over the place.


I had a very nice doctor, back down in California, who had moved out from the East Coast some time ago, and thought San Francisco was the "L"iberal backbone of society. So he moved to Walnut Creek, a "suburb" east of Berkeley, east of the Berkeley Hills, thinking it was liberal, too, because of its proximity to SF.


He observed: "How do you know how redneck your community is? Count the F150s on your block!"


My wife refuses to get a "regular" car after driving an MPV van (soccer m om, but he played lacrosse!) and now our CUV Hyundai Santa Fe. "It's too low," she says. Who am I to argue?


See? Market. And we drove all over Europe in our numerous visits there, never once in a van and sometimes in Ford Fiestas with three adults, a kid and luggage. Learned how to provision a boat by packing that car for a road trip!

[dannc]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

The primary reason for changing to electronic control of diesel engines was exhaust emissions. We can probably all remember the trucks going down the highway belching a cloud of smoke every time the driver changed gears and applied the accelerator....

The black cloud of diesel smoke pretty much ended in the US when we moved from LSD(Low Sulfur Diesel) to ULSD(Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel). My 20+ year old diesel pick up would smoke a bit if I put my foot into the Go Pedal with LSD. If I do the same with ULSD there really is not much smoke. Even with LSD, my truck did not belch black smoke if I did not do a jack rabbit start. I really wonder how much of an improvement that new engines are pollution wise vs the old engines when using ULSD.

Later,
Dan

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by bcboomer

It's been tried in Canada and the US but buyers were not interested. Volkswagen et al didn't help when they cheated on the emissions/fuel economy/performance process.

Central control systems have a major weak point: the central control. When it fails, everything fails. Reliability should win over cost savings on a few feet of wire. Computer chips can and do fail. Cost of troubleshooting, and of a spare computer can be very high. With the proliferation of engine and vehicle electronics, it seems to be impossible to find knowledgeable mechanics and technicians. More and more technology is introduced at a pace that exceeds personnel ability to learn about it. Many problems seem to be a new learning experience for repair people. Many problems go unsolved. Customers get billed for unproductive work that can be either a side trip to the real problem, or does not solve it at all. Many of these problems require manufacturer specific knowledge and information, and the dealer service departments price their work much higher than independent shops. It all ends up in high financial costs and major inconvenience to the owner. Technology introduced at a pace that exceeds the ability to deal with it is ultimately a failure.

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by dannc

The black cloud of diesel smoke pretty much ended in the US when we moved from LSD(Low Sulfur Diesel) to ULSD(Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel). My 20+ year old diesel pick up would smoke a bit if I put my foot into the Go Pedal with LSD. If I do the same with ULSD there really is not much smoke. Even with LSD, my truck did not belch black smoke if I did not do a jack rabbit start. I really wonder how much of an improvement that new engines are pollution wise vs the old engines when using ULSD.

Later,
Dan

Good point on emissions improvements due to LSD. However, LSD has a lower lubricity that leads to early wear on fuel pumps and injectors. This requires the cost of fuel additives that restore lubricity. Another point that has been missed on engine reliability is improvements in lube oil. Engine oils of today are vastly superior oils of a few decades ago.

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

I believe it is the market. Like the people who are buying the cars = the market.


F150s aren't all that common in Europe, are they? There's a reason for that, I'd bet. Yet once you get a little ways outside a US city, they're all over the place.


I had a very nice doctor, back down in California, who had moved out from the East Coast some time ago, and thought San Francisco was the "L"iberal backbone of society. So he moved to Walnut Creek, a "suburb" east of Berkeley, east of the Berkeley Hills, thinking it was liberal, too, because of its proximity to SF.


He observed: "How do you know how redneck your community is? Count the F150s on your block!"


My wife refuses to get a "regular" car after driving an MPV van (soccer m om, but he played lacrosse!) and now our CUV Hyundai Santa Fe. "It's too low," she says. Who am I to argue?


See? Market. And we drove all over Europe in our numerous visits there, never once in a van and sometimes in Ford Fiestas with three adults, a kid and luggage. Learned how to provision a boat by packing that car for a road trip!

It seems that a major cultural difference between Europe and North America is the number of people who participate in outdoor recreation and work activities that require pick up trucks and it seems that there is more do it yourself activity in North America than Europe. Americans and Canadians seem to be more into doing their own home improvements, camping and cottaging, hunting, hiking, fishing boating, etc. Even small home based businesses that require trucks seem to be more common. All this seems to add up to a demand for light trucks in Canada and the US that is much smaller than in Europe. People who participate in these activities tend to hold conservative values more so than those who do not.


Most people do not even know the origin of the term. I worked on the Gulf of Mexico with some fine southern people who would be labelled as red necks. I had a ship captain tell me the origin. Perhaps this is common knowledge, but in my younger years I had not known the etymology of the word. In the days of manual farm labor, these people developed sun burn and tan on their necks from working outdoors. Hence the name. In reality most of these people were and still are just good honest hard working people. It is used as a disparaging term, but in reality these are mostly honorable working people. The latte drinking "refined" liberals delight in calling anyone with whom they disagree a "red neck" without knowing the meaning. The liberals need to be reminded that "red necks" had a hand in producing many products that they use. If pick up truck ownership is part of the formula, so be it.