New Trucks in 07 will cost consumers millions!

[Emmett]

I wonder how many of you are aware that you are about to get raped? In the Pocket! I mean raped!

Starting tomorrow all diesel fuel sold in the United States will now be mandated to be refined to a point of only 15 ppm of particulate matter. The new engines for 07 are mandated to have reuseable particulate filters (ceramic) which will clean the rest out of the fuel. The engines are heavier allowing less freight to be transported, the fuel has less lubricity resulting in damage to older engines and the trucks are 10 to 15 % more expensive not to say anything about the maintanence of these new techno marvels.

As many of you know I am a temporary truck driver and I can tell you that my 1999 KW with a Cat engine gets 20% less fuel mileage on the new fuel. Ouch!!!!! Twenty Percent!

OK, less mileage, no lubricity, heavier design, less freight per truck transported = your screwed. I have no numbers but I would imagine consumers will feel an immediate effect from costs being absorbed by the Trucking industry being passed on.

One of you article finders ought to dig up some info cause this is a good subject and we need some new material.

 

[90K]

Alright so help me out here on this new filter and fuel deal. If you are getting 20% less fuel mileage now with the newer fuel why is it? And is this calculation used while driving the posted speeds? Or hammer down? You said less over all lube correct? Why not use bio-diesel? I mean besides cleaning your engine and possibly having to replace your fuel filter more often what else are the limitations? I know it is limited but are you OTR or local? Can't you do something to re program you primary computers to increase mileage with out leaning it to much? When you mention weight and less cargo, how much are we talking about? Several thousand pounds or what? I'm actually interested in these findings. I drove a truck in the Navy as an explosive driver so our methods were within DOT and I didn’t always have the greatest or most modern equipment unless we rented trucks. I knew it was a matter of time before the consumers were hit for moving supplies and goods via interstate highways. I also know that great amounts of work have been done to refine the railway systems to move goods and garbage throughout our country. As an independent driver where does this leave you in the messy loop?

 

[Emmett]

Alright so help me out here on this new filter and fuel deal. If you are getting 20% less fuel mileage now with the newer fuel why is it? And is this calculation used while driving the posted speeds? Or hammer down? You said less over all lube correct? Why not use bio-diesel? I mean besides cleaning your engine and possibly having to replace your fuel filter more often what else are the limitations? I know it is limited but are you OTR or local? Can't you do something to re program you primary computers to increase mileage with out leaning it to much? When you mention weight and less cargo, how much are we talking about? Several thousand pounds or what? I'm actually interested in these findings. I drove a truck in the Navy as an explosive driver so our methods were within DOT and I didn’t always have the greatest or most modern equipment unless we rented trucks. I knew it was a matter of time before the consumers were hit for moving supplies and goods via interstate highways. I also know that great amounts of work have been done to refine the railway systems to move goods and garbage throughout our country. As an independent driver where does this leave you in the messy loop?

Less lubricity of course harms an engine by providing less necessary lubrication to vital top engine componets. That in itself brings down effieciency of the engine while shortning life, less mileage etc,...

Furthurmore the newer fuel because it is thinner it subject to heating faster. "Hot fuel" expands. It is supposed to be about 1.7 % or so. Point: You pump 100 gallons, you get 98.3 gallons. Truck holding 200 gallons just lost over 3 gallons per fill. 10 bucks. Multiply by how many times a year you fill = substantial figure.

Engines that do not run at top eff. burn more oil. That is not conservation either.

The newer engines are about 800 lbs heavier. Less mileage.

The new particulate filters have to be serviced at 30,000 intervals. More cost.

Older engines will not perform on newer Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel properly, more cost. More repair, less mileage.

You may learn more about this subject at lots of sites but I would think that OOIDA (Owner Operators Independant Drivers Assoc) would have the best and most accurate information.

 

[theHawk]

I wonder how many of you are aware that you are about to get raped? In the Pocket! I mean raped!

Starting tomorrow all diesel fuel sold in the United States will now be mandated to be refined to a point of only 15 ppm of particulate matter. The new engines for 07 are mandated to have reuseable particulate filters (ceramic) which will clean the rest out of the fuel. The engines are heavier allowing less freight to be transported, the fuel has less lubricity resulting in damage to older engines and the trucks are 10 to 15 % more expensive not to say anything about the maintanence of these new techno marvels.

As many of you know I am a temporary truck driver and I can tell you that my 1999 KW with a Cat engine gets 20% less fuel mileage on the new fuel. Ouch!!!!! Twenty Percent!

OK, less mileage, no lubricity, heavier design, less freight per truck transported = your screwed. I have no numbers but I would imagine consumers will feel an immediate effect from costs being absorbed by the Trucking industry being passed on.

One of you article finders ought to dig up some info cause this is a good subject and we need some new material.

What is the purpose of this change in the fuel? Is it suppose to be cheaper? More environmentally friendly?

 

[theHawk]

OK found some info on it on the epa webpage:

Beginning June 1, 2006, refiners must begin producing clean ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel- diesel fuel with a sulfur level that is at or below 15 parts per million (ppm)- for use in highway diesel engines. Low sulfur (500 ppm) diesel fuel for nonroad diesel engines will be required in 2007, followed by ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel for these machines in 2010, and for locomotives and marine engines in 2012.

Besides reducing emissions from the existing diesel fleet, these clean fuels will enable the use of advanced aftertreatment technologies on new engines. Technologies like particulate traps, capable of emission reductions of 90% and more, will be required under new standards set to begin phasing into the highway sector in 2007, and into the nonroad sector in 2011. These programs will yield enormous long-term benefits for public health and the environment. By 2030, when the engine fleet has been fully turned over, PM and NOx will be reduced by 250,000 tons/year and 4 million tons/year, respectively. This will result in annual benefits of over $150 billion, at a cost of approximately $7 billion. Similar stringent emissions standards for locomotives and marine diesels are now being developed. EPA is also working to reduce emissions from large commercial marine diesel vessels like cruise and container ships through the use of cleaner fuels and engines.

Together these programs will yield enormous long-term benefits for public health and the environment.

http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/



More:

Federal rules require that effective Sunday, 80 percent of all diesel sold must meet the new sulfur limits. Many refiners will continue to make some of the older-style diesel that can be used in train locomotives, farm vehicles, ships and mining equipment until it is phased out from 2010 to 2014.

The new fuel can be used in any diesel engine. Owners of 2007 and later model year diesel vehicles must use the ultra-low sulfur fuel.

In older engines, the new fuel will cut soot emissions by 10 percent. In new diesel vehicles, the fuel will cut emissions by up to 95 percent.

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_4472509

 

[Emmett]

OK found some info on it on the epa webpage:




http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/



More:


http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_4472509

While it is true that the new ULSD (ultra low sulphur diesel) will cut soot emisions considerably in older engines it is destructive to them because it does not contain enough lubricant to properly lubricate top cylinder engine componets. Those of us who operate pre 2007 equipment are very concerned about this. The 500 ppm (low sulphur) diesel fuel lacked lubricity as well but aftermarket products are available (additives) which helped us add lubrication and injector cleaner to the fuel. With 15 ppm diesel it would require adding too much cleaner and become destructive to the injectors themselves by causing cracking and eroding away the tips of them.

It's a serious problem!

 

[insein]

Wouldnt this be defeating the purpose (not that im suprised). If the fuel is safer on emmissions but you have to use 20% more of it due to its destructive side effects on engines, then it wouldnt really be that much safer. Using 120% of the Safer fuel vs 100% of the "unsafe" fuel probably has the same damaging effects to the environment.

Whatever. I'm all for helping the environment where possible but government mandates that hurt industry AND still screw the environment make no sense.

 

[trobinett]

The "secret" to this dilima, is NEW TRUCKS.

The "players", read LARGE trucking companies, have been replacing their fleets with the more modern trucks, that were designed to run on the new fuel. Hence, better fuel mileage, AND lower emissions.

Seems to be reasonable to me.

 

[90K]

The "secret" to this dilima, is NEW TRUCKS.

The "players", read LARGE trucking companies, have been replacing their fleets with the more modern trucks, that were designed to run on the new fuel. Hence, better fuel mileage, AND lower emissions.

Seems to be reasonable to me.

Good point: There are allot of old unsafe rigs on the road today. Thus a push to sell massive newer units and make it un-attractive to operate older units. One thing I knew while I was driving is that the newer engines don't use the oil the older units once did! Now that was about 10 years ago. And prior to that say 15 years earlier I had operated a lot of heavy equipment and you could bet every morning I'd put at least 2 plus quarts in my machine.
I did read a very interesting article out of a auto-manufacturing paper last summer while on a plane to Dallas and this article made mention of a new exhaust filter that would virtually rid all soot from diesel exhaust. It was being used in Europe--->go figure! and they found it had done wonders for the smoke and soot from diesels! It didn't go into specifics like changing or replacements and stuff like that. Also I would have thunk some group of engineers would have found an upper lube replacement to use to in place of the reduced sulfur. I haven't read the provided link yet but I'm on it.

 

[sitarro]

Emmett, I have a question that comes up everytime I drive by a truck stop at night and see 300 or more trucks parked and running. How much fuel is being used and is it just to run air conditioning and a TV? Wouldn't it be a smarter idea for the truck stop to have electrical connections that could be rented for a reasonable fee? Seems like a tremendous amount of fuel is being used every night across the country not to mention the pollution.

 

[90K]

Emmett, I have a question that comes up everytime I drive by a truck stop at night and see 300 or more trucks parked and running. How much fuel is being used and is it just to run air conditioning and a TV? Wouldn't it be a smarter idea for the truck stop to have electrical connections that could be rented for a reasonable fee? Seems like a tremendous amount of fuel is being used every night across the country not to mention the pollution.

Well that is a good question and to be honest very little. Since diesels are internal combustion and use no spark but pressure to fire those cylinders diesels at idle are at there most efficient and they stay cool and won't over heat hence no spark. But newer units are now using separate generators to run heaters and A/C and TV and ect to keep cost down while fuel prices soar. I don't have a link related to your question but I know Volvo had a system that would kill the engine and refire to either cool or heat the cab and this was said to be the most efficient idea on the market some years ago.

 

[Emmett]

Truck Stops all over the country ARE using the "hook ups". It is called Idle-Aire. Trucks can pull in and attach via their window a heating/cooling module that has a computer, stereo and other offerings. It's expensive, about the cost of idleing your truck.

90K: You have good point as well, HOWEVER.............I can't afford a new 129,000 dollar truck right now. Of course I could scrap it, just park it and go to work for one of those new modern superfleets you are describing. Of course that would just make them 1 unit bigger and the industry 1 unit less competitive but it would also move us 1 unit closer to a ONE WORLD ORDER wouldn't it? I mean, hell, who needs independant truckers operating with a pioneer spirit out there anyway!

The truck I drive is a 99 KW. It's in good condition and is hardly an UNSAFE rig just because it has trouble digesting the new non-lubricating ULSD fuel.

As for idleing. There are a list of new companies who are marketing self contained auxiliary power units now that heat and cool, provide 110 power and are efficient. They cost 6,000 to 10,000 dollars and I can't afford one of those yet either. They will however be the thing of the future and I like them.

The new engines are being equipped with aftertreatment technologies such as mentioned in the article Hawk pulled up. The Particulate matter from emisions is trapped in a cylindrical cermaic filter after reroute. It does reduce emisions considerably and is great technology, I like the idea but it is the sudden changes that caught me. All truck engine manufacturers of 2007 and later have to build their engines to accomodate this new technology and they must run on the new fuel. Fine! However the cost is extreme and small independants ( the few that are left / 1.4 of 100 trucks on the road) cannot afford these new trucks. Our engines while not ancient simply just won't run effienciently on the new fuel. As a matter of fact they run worse.

Oh yeah! The fuel cost more to refine! The new engines are heavier allowing less frieght to be carried. The filters have to be serviced by a dealer ONLY! It is expensive also. Bare in mind also that thenew engines don't burn Bio Diesel worth a damn! Talk about soot!

Look, we all want a liveable enviornment. America was founded on ideals of independence. Mom and Pop places are skeletons all over the nation, big companies have won the cost/overhead game until there will be no mom and pop. Where dores it stop? When there is ONE company? Basically, this will finish off alot of the die-hard truckers and they will accomodate your idea of giving up and going to work for one of the biggies. Will we really be winning when that happens?

The legislature has been wrong on trucking time and time again. Deregulation was good in theory but led to the breakdown of service to customers in trucking and whored the rates down so bad the small guy could not compete. Oh, but the know it alls kept going! They revised the hours of service laws for truckers. The new law is actually more dangerous than the old one. A trucker used to be able to take two four hour breaks during a driving session of ten hours. This time HAD to be spent in the sleeper. You could chop it up, a two hour and a six hour. Now you must have one continuous 8 hr sleeper shown each 24 hr day and another 2 hours off duty on top of that, let me tell you, that is dangerous!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Example: A driver is 200 miles away from his destination and is sleepy at 2:00 in the morning. He has plenty of drive time he can log to get to destination but cannot stop because he must STAY stopped for 8 hours if he does. That will maqke him late!!!! Now if he could stop and take a 2 hour power nap, get back up and still make his 8:00 appt he would be more apt to pull over and do so. Instead he tredges on and is more apt to be an unsafe driver, fall asleep at the wheel or whatever. In their infinite wisdom, they didn't think of that! Imagine!

Hell, I don't know a damn soul that actually sleeps 8 hours a day unless they have no job, life etc,... much less 10 hours. I mean, I can't do it!

This in itself tells me that Lawmakers know very little about the trucking industry, it's requirements on truck fleets, the truck driver persay or trucks impact on the enviornment!

Oh yeah! Where will all that sooted material taken from the particulate filters go? Rivers? Ground Soil? Uh.... maybe we'll bottle it and shoot it at criminals huh! One thing is for sure, it will be solid waste! At least exhaust sent into the air has dissipation factors to consider and alot evaporates. A solid is a solid!

OK, lets recap!

Less mileage, less effieciency, more cost, not REALLY helping the enviornment, heavier engines, less lube factor for the older ones and more expensive trucks.

Bigger fleets, less independents, larger companies, big oil wins again and blah blah.

I don't get it!

 

[90K]

Emmett,
You do bring some really good answers to the table. But one step better on my part. You mentioned a 99 KW, what you'd have about 400-700K on it? Right? So yes your truck may be in good shape given all things, but you know there are some real hunks of crap on the road that need to be recycled. I'm on the opinion of this and I'm all for those old Petes and Macks that are retro looking with 3 million plus miles on them that have been up graded. And as you made clear the independent driver busting a hump is a two fold deal. One safety and also the ability to upgrade equipment, I couldn't even fathom the cost of a new unit with a day cab configuration let alone what a new unit would cost with a walk in 84" sleeper and whatnot. I'm in the safety industry and I can look at all the laws set up objectivity and you say that eight hours is too long to sleep, yet test have shown you need those hours to fully recharge ones self to be efficient from a human factor point. Also it is a fact of a lot of drivers that used drugs out there and are very unsafe. You can also look at ergonomics with regards to the newer cab configurations and the ease of keeping situational awareness on the road. You can agree being on the road and hitting a major city at say rush hour can be extremely stressful not to mention irritating after being on the road all day. I see many of these laws as grounds on how to re-evaluate your trip and how to become more attuned to self and be a safer driver. Yet I also understand if that axel ain't turning then you ain't making a buck so what gives? Could this be a push to make independent drivers like yourself a thing of the past? I guess if you love your job and the freedoms it gives you then these are set backs to the original goal. I’m sure that you will be able to find work arounds in the new future on how to bypass this new fuel with some add on part or additive to the fuel or to the engine. Now my question is does this fuel across the board affect every make of diesel engine? Or does it affect say Cats different than say Detroit’s?

 

[trobinett]

Interesting discussion going on guys.

Having been an independent business man for 30 plus years, I know what it means to fight the "big boys", it means you LOSE.

Ya have to find you a niche, one you can do better, or the big boys aren't interested in, and run with it.

I've seen too many, hard working independents bite the dust cause they wouldn't change their ways.

The independents should be able to react quicker to the market place, take advantage of their strengths, and make a good living from it.

If you dig your boots in, refuse to change, and don't take advantage of your strong suits, you'll lose.

Case in point. The business I own now is a lawn, and garden operation. Years ago we use to sell whole goods, and service ONLY what we sold. As the margins began to shrink, thanks to the big box stores, Lowe's, Home Depot too name just two, we moved away from whole goods sales, and concentrated our efforts toward service on all makes, and models. Not only that, but we also do the warranty for the box stores. We've also increased the size of our parts department, which turned out to be the smartest thing we've done in years! Where as we were making about 20% on whole goods, we make upwards to a 100% on parts, sweet. Course, you still tie money up in inventory, about 120K at this point, but return on investment is better than CD's or even the stock market.

The point being, be flexible, be ready to change your business plan to take advantage of market changes, and don't get caught up in wishful thinking.

Things are NOT going to turn in your favor, unless you take the initiative, and except that change is a given, and change will only happen at a faster pace. Go with the flow, and good luck.

 

[90K]

Trobinett,
Sounds very wise. But what about the driver or business owner that is just getting by? Profits are very unpredictable and sometimes are lean while other times it abundant? I know a lot of guys in my area who drive dump trucks and in our area in about a 300 mile area is building like crazy. So for them it seems like a good deal because that axel is turning allot. I was told I could even drive part time over here and start at 19-22 bucks an hour! Really I was surprised and I've thought about it a lot but because I'm in school and I have a steady job that clears way more than that I've opted to hold off for a while. And a lot of the bigger companies are driving automatics which me a lot less work on the stick in traffic and I think that is a plus.

 

[trobinett]

Trobinett,
Sounds very wise. But what about the driver or business owner that is just getting by? Profits are very unpredictable and sometimes are lean while other times it abundant? I know a lot of guys in my area who drive dump trucks and in our area in about a 300 mile area is building like crazy. So for them it seems like a good deal because that axel is turning allot. I was told I could even drive part time over here and start at 19-22 bucks an hour! Really I was surprised and I've thought about it a lot but because I'm in school and I have a steady job that clears way more than that I've opted to hold off for a while. And a lot of the bigger companies are driving automatics which me a lot less work on the stick in traffic and I think that is a plus.

That's VERY wise 90K.

I only hope our friend Emmett takes your advice.

That is exactly what I'm referring to, find a nitch, and run with it.

My son, who is 36, has been a OTR driver for 10 years, makes a good living, and drives for a big company. Has good benefits, is home on the weekends, and doesn't have to worry about insurance, fuel, or any other of the issues that face an independent.

For the years BERFORE he became an OTR driver, he drove for a gravel company, and did very well, but that was in California, things are different in Arkansas.

I sure respect Emmett's work ethic, but ya got to know when to call enough, enough.

 

[Emmett]

I understand that trucking has held a certain element of uncertainty. O/o's fell like flies in the early 80's. Alot of them probably could h ave survived had they attempted to be more flexible. Personally I haul cars. It requires alot of physical effort in addition to just being a truck driver. Alot of logistics are involved in jigsawing the units together on each load which is different every load. It is significantly different than just backing up to a freight dock, getting in the sleeper and gatting woke up when empty/loaded. Slightly less miles, more physical work and somewhat less stress on truck per week / period of time etc,...

My truck has 800,000 miles on it. A Tractor kept well nowadays can perform very well up into the high 1's or 2 million miles. Naturally it would require a couple of rebuilds to acheive this but it is conceivable., you mentioned 3 million mile junk. I also have an 89 KW with 2.6 million on a Mechanical cat 425 that gets 6.85 or so mpg. It pulls an eight car high mount trailor and performs quite well. It passes inspection every time and therefore would be considered road worthy. It is. I drive it from to time when work is being done on one of my two other trucks. I also have a 2001 Freightliner Classic Limited / 84" w/ Cummins Red Top 500 hp, it is an awesomely good performing truck. I rebuilt the engine last year at 7 something and it does very well. That is actually the engine I worry most about when concerning the new fuel. My third unit is the 99 KW which is a 10 car hauler set with Headrack (3 car) and Boydston 7/8 car model 9178s, stinger type trailor.

I re=entered the trucking industry after being out of a truck for 19 years, many years ago I worked for United Van Lines as an owner operator / lease driver as a long distance mover. I got into car hauling toward the end iof that and that is what sort of pushed me in that direction this time around. I came back to the business not necessaryily by choice. During the years I was out of the business I worked in the transportation industry as well as at a few other things but ending up building one of the fastest growing major market repossession companies in the US> Four years ago I was sued and had to settle a lawsuit which caused us to shoot the company in the head and regroup.

To answer the question of brands. I believe Cats are less effected than Detroits and Cummins. Cummins are sensative. When tuned they perform very well but seem more affected by elements, different drivers, temp and LUBRICATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Detroits I have no new experience with. I have no trucks with Detroits. I have had 14 or 16 Intl Power Stroke diesels in the F seris p/u's we used as rep[o trucks and have over 500,000 on a few of them. Those engines at that size to me far outperfrom the Cummins that comes in Dodge trucks of that seris / weight class.